SH. ASHOK KUMAR SINGHAL,BULANDSHAHR vs. ACIT, BULANDSHAHR

Date of Hearing 21.06.2016 Date of Pronouncement 19.08.2016 ORDER The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 18.03.2014 of CIT(A), Meerut pertaining to 2006-07 assessment year on various grounds. However, at the time of hearing the parties were heard only in respect to the issue addressed vide Ground Nos. 1 & 2 which read as under:-

preferred before him. This not having been done, and the appeal having been dismissed in-limine, the order of the CIT(A) is vitiated and be, therefore, quashed.”

2. The relevant facts of the case are that after affording various opportunities to the assessee, the CIT(A) proceeded to dismiss the appeal holding as under:-

3. “From the above it is evident that more than sufficient opportunities of being heard have been allowed to the appellant. However, the appellant either has not made any compliance or has filed adjournment application. This implies that the appellant is not interested in pursuing the appeal for I.T.A .No.-4325/Del/2014 the reasons best known to him. Therefore, the appeal is disposed off on the basis of material evidence on the record. 4. Since the appellant has not furnished any details and evidences. Therefore, in the absence of the same, it is held that the AO was justified in making the order.” 3. Ld. AR relying on statements of facts filed before the ITAT submitted that the concerned CIT(A) was holding substantive charge as CIT(A), Muzaffarnagar and additional charge as CIT(A), Ghaziabad and Meerut. Thus, he was not regularly staying at Meerut and frequently travelling. The hearings were routinely carried out in a cursory manner as a matter of routine in a lot of cases as and when he visited Meerut. Accordingly a prayer was made that the issue may be restored back to the CIT(A) for a decision on merit as the correctness of the rectification order dated 18.08.2011 passed by the AO has been assailed by the assessee on various grounds which have not been addressed.

I.T.A .No.-4325/Del/2014 5.1. A perusal of the above provision shows that the CIT(A) while deciding the appeal is statutorily required to set out in writing the points for determination and the decision thereon supported by reasons for the conclusion. The said exercise is found to be missing. Accordingly to make up the statutory deficit available on record the issue is set aside back to the CIT(A) with a direction to pass a speaking order in accordance with law in terms of the statutory mandate. Needless to say that a reasonable opportunity of being heard shall be provided to the assessee by the CIT(A) before passing the order.