S.USHA,CHENNAI vs. ITO, PONDICHERRY

आदेश / O R D E R In this appeal filed by the assessee, it grievance is that ld.

ITA No. 3405/Mds/2016 :- 2 -:

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) shows that the appeal of the assessee was disposed of ex-parte for want of appearance by the assessee or its ld. Authorised Representative. No doubt large number of opportunities were given by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to the assessee but still assessee did not enter appearance.

Ld. Assessing Officer had completed the assessment applying 6.03% as gross profit ratio on turnover of the assessee who was a dealer of Indian made foreign liquor against 4.44% admitted by the assessee.

Assessee had not produced the books of accounts. However, when assessee moved in appeal, ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) did not deal with the merits of the appeal. Sec.250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘’the Act’’) requires the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to dispose of the appeal stating points for determination the decision thereon and the reasons for reaching the decision. Considering the circumstances, I am of the opinion that assessee can be given one last chance for representing its case before ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is set aside and the appeal is remitted back to his file for consideration afresh in accordance with law. Needless to say, assessee shall be given only one opportunity for ITA No. 3405/Mds/2016 :- 3 -: presenting his case, considering peculiar facts and circumstances.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for 3. statistical purpose. Order pronounced on Wednesday, the 29th day of March, 2017, at Chennai