Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH: KOLKATA
Before: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Dr. Arjun Lal Saini
ORDER Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, JM:
This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), 14, Kolkata dt. 17-02-2017 for the A.Y 2010-11.
The only issue to be decided as to whether the CIT-A is justified in passing ex prate order without giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee in the facts and circumstances of the case.
The ld.AR submitted that the CIT-A passed ex parte order without giving sufficient time to assessee to prosecute his case and prayed to remand the appeal issues to the file of CIT-A.
On the other hand, the ld.DR opposed to the same as submitted by the ld.AR of the assessee. He also submitted that inspite of having sufficient opportunity of hearing the assessee has failed to substantiate/prosecute his case by filing requisite evidence.
Heard both the parties and perused the record. Before us the ld.AR submitted that the CIT-A passed ex parte order without giving sufficient time to assessee to prosecute his case. We find that the CIT-A fixed the hearings on ten (10) occasions. In all the dates of hearing the assessee remained absent. We also note that the AO determined the income of assessee at Rs.19,21,656/- wherein he estimated the profit of assessee at 8% on gross contractual receipts u/s. 144 of the Act. In our opinion that for the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee before the CIT-A requires assistance of assessee by placing evidences in support of the contention. Since the CIT-A passed ex parte order admittedly there was no representation on behalf of the assessee in the first appellate proceedings, taking into consideration the submissions of the assessee and in the interest of justice, we deem it fit and proper to remand the issue(s) to the file of the CIT-A for his fresh consideration and to pass a fresh order as per law. The assessee shall be at liberty to file evidences, if any, to substantiate his case. The assessee is also directed not to seek any further adjournment before the CIT-A in the first appellate proceedings. Therefore, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.