KANNIAN UDAYAPRAKASH,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NON CORP WARD-19(1), CHENNAI

At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that Ld. CIT(A) had not followed the principles of natural justice. Ld. Counsel for the appellant further prayed that if an adequate opportunity of hearing is given to appellant, appellant would prosecute his case properly before the Ld. CIT(A).

On the other hand, the Ld. Sr. DR pleaded for dismissal of the appeal on the ground that the assessee failed to appear before the ld. first appeal authority.

From the case record, it emerges that Assessing Officer passed assessment order under section 143(3) r.w. section 147 of the Act vide order dated 20.12.2018 and made addition on account of unexplained income u/s 68. Assessment Order under section 143(3) r.w. section 147 of the Act dated 20.12.2018 was further challenged in appeal wherein the assessee did not appear before the first appeal authority. Accordingly, the assessment was confirmed on merits and appeal was disposed of ex-parte on the basis of statements of facts filed by the Assessee against which assessee is in further appeal before us.

We have heard the rival contention and perused the material on record. Though we appreciate the submissions of Ld. Sr. DR however keeping in mind the principles of natural justice we deem it appropriate to grant another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate his case forthwith without any fail failing which Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to proceed with the disposal of the appeal on merits.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in 2011-2012 is allowed for statistical purpose.