VISHIST KUMAR,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD 41(1), NEW DELHI

However, at the time of hearing, no one was present on behalf of the assessee. The appeal was passed over. Despite that the position remained the same in the next round also.

A perusal of the record shows that the assessee at a point of time was represented by some counsel before the CIT(A), however, since the appearance was without any power of attorney, the appeal was adjourned. It is seen that the assessee also appeared in person at one point of time, however, on the various dates given no one was present on behalf of the assessee. In the said background the facts as considered by the Assessing Officer were accepted by the CIT(A) to confirm the addition made. In the aforesaid back ground, it is evident from record that though opportunity has been provided to the assessee by the First Appellate Authority, however, effective opportunity of being heard has not been availed. It is seen that the grievance of the assessee qua the assessment made persists. Accordingly, after taking into consideration the factual back ground as emanating from record, the impugned order is set aside back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) restoring the issues back with the directions to the assessee to ensure full and proper representation and not to abuse the trust reposed. The CIT(A) it is made clear shall pass a speaking order in accordance with law after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Said order was pronounced at the time of virtual hearing itself in the presence of the parties Webex.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.