Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI G.S.PANNU
ORDER The captioned appeals filed by the assessee pertaining to assessment years 2009-10 & 2010-11 are directed against orders passed by CIT(A)-44, Mumbai dated 18/03/2013, which in turn, arise out of orders passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) dated 25/03/2013.
It is seen from the record that the notice for hearing has been sent to the stated address of the appellant by registered post, which has come back as unclaimed. As a consequence, I proceed to dispose of these appeals, ex-parte, qua the assessee after hearing Ld. Departmental Representative on merits as per Rule 24 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963.
In both assessment years, the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals of the assessee noticing the absence of the assessee inspite of the notice of hearing having been issued. It is noticed that the appeals have been dismissed merely on the ground that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeals. However, the requirement of section 250(6) of the Act is that the CIT(A) shall dispose of the appeal in writing by stating the point for determination and the decision thereon and the reasons for the decisions. The impugned orders of the CIT(A) show that the issues raised in the Grounds of appeal by the assessee have not been culled out and adjudicated, whereas the appeals have been dismissed merely noticing the absence of the assessee.
4. In my considered opinion, the CIT(A) ought to have disposed of the appeals in terms of the mandate of section 250(6) of the Act and not in a summary manner. In this view of the matter, without going into the merits of the issues involved, the orders of the CIT(A) are se-aside and the appeals are restored back to his file for fresh adjudication in accordance with law after allowing the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard as per law. As a consequence, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 29/12/2016