Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC-2’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. N. K. Saini
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC-2’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Accountant Member & 6570/Del/2015 : Asstt. Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Sh. Sanjay Sharma, Vs Income Tax Officer, C-54, Gujranwala Apartments, Ward-44(1), Block-J, Vikaspuri, New Delhi New Delhi-110018 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AHCPS8326E Assessee by : None Revenue by : Sh. Amrit Lal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 22.08.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 26.08.2016 ORDER
These two appeals by the assessee are directed against the separate orders each dated 29.09.2015 of ld. CIT(A)-XV, Delhi.
Since the appeals were heard together so these are being disposed off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity.
During the course of hearing nobody was present on behalf of the assessee neither any adjournment was sought. Therefore, the appeals are decided ex-parte after hearing the ld. DR on merit. & 6570/Del/2015 2 Sanjay Sharma 4. The main grievance of the assessee in these appeals relates to the action of the ld. CIT(A) in dismissing the appeal ex-parte on account of non-prosecution without considering the merit. It is noticed that the ld. CIT(A) decided the appeals of the assessee ex-parte for non-prosecution in limine. He mentioned in para 2 of the impugned order that a notice was issued fixing the date of hearing on 28.09.2015 which remained uncomplied. He also mentioned that during the assessment proceedings the assessee did not comply with the statutory notices. Therefore, the assessment was completed ex-parte on the basis of information available with the AO.
During the course of hearing the ld. DR strongly supported the impugned orders and reiterated the observations made by the ld. CIT(A) in para 2 of the impugned order.
I have considered the submissions of the ld. DR and perused the material available on the record. In the present case, it is noticed that the ld. CIT(A) in para 2 of the impugned order simply stated that notices of hearing were issued to the assessee. However, it is not brought on record that the notice issued for hearing on 28.09.2015 was served upon the assessee. It is well settled that nobody should be condemned unheard as per the maxim “audi alteram partem”. I, therefore, deem it appropriate to remand these cases back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh in accordance with law on merit after providing due and & 6570/Del/2015 3 Sanjay Sharma reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate and not to seek undue or unwarranted adjournments.
In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. (Order Pronounced in the Court on 26/08/2016)