NAINA DEVI COMMERCE PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 6(3), KOLKATA

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the appellate order has been passed ex-parte by the Ld. CIT(A) thereby dismissing the appeal of the assessee in liminie without discussing and deciding the issues on merit. The Ld. A.R submitted that though the Ld. CIT(A) in the appellate proceedings allowed the four hearings to the assessee on 27.11.2023, 18.12.2023, 3.1.2024 and 31.01.2024 for Assessment Year: 2013-14 Naina Devi Commerce Pvt. Ltd. which the notices were sent on the email of the accountant and therefore the assessee was not knowing about the dates of hearing. As a result, the same could not be attended before the appellate authority. The Ld. A.R therefore submitted that in the interest of justice and fair play, the assessee may kindly be given one more opportunity to present its case on merit before the Ld. CIT(A), so the same could be decided on merit.

The Ld. D.R on the other hand relied on the order of authorities below.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that undisputedly the appellate order passed ex-parte in liminie without discussing and deciding the issue on merit which is in clear violation of provision of Section 250(6) which provides that the Ld. CIT(A) has to state the point of determination and also the decision thereon and reasons for the said decision which has not been done by the appellate authority. Therefore the interest of justice would be well served if the appeal is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to decide the issue on merit which is in accordance with the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 (SC). Consequently we restore the appeal to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with the direction to decide the same on merit after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 5.