ASHIT KUMAR ROY,HOOGHLY vs. ITO, WD-2(2), BWN, BURDWAN

The relevant facts of the case giving rise to this appeal are that the assessee is an individual, who is engaged in the business of transportation. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by him on 26.03.2007 declaring total income of Rs.83,203/-. The said return was originally processed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(1) on 01.11.2007. Subsequently he reopened the assessment after having found that the assessee had received a sum of Rs.10,54,827/- as interest, which was not reflected in his total income. Accordingly, a notice under section 148 was issued by the Assessing Officer on ./2016 Assessment year: 2006-2007 Page 2 of 3 18.07.2011 in compliance to which, a letter was filed by the assessee on 13.09.2011 stating therein that the return already filed by him may be treated as the return filed in response to notice under section 148. In pursuance to the notice issued under section 148, the assessment under section 147/143(3) was completed by the Assessing Officer vide an order dated 27.07.2012 determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.15,54,546/- after making addition of Rs.4,16,516/- on account of income from long-term capital gain and Rs.10,54,827/- on account of income from other sources.

Against the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 147/143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) challenging the validity of the said assessment as well as disputing the additions made therein to his total income on merit. Since there was no compliance on the part of the assessee to the notices issued by him during the course of appellate proceedings fixing the appeal for hearing from time to time, the ld. CIT(Appeals) proceeded to dismiss the appeal of the assessee by his appellate order dated 29.03.2016 passed ex- parte. Aggrieved by the said order of the ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.

I have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. Although the assesese has raised in this appeal a preliminary issue challenging the validity of the assessment made by the Assessing Officer under section 147/143(3) and has also raised grounds disputing both the additions made by the Assessing Officer to his total income and the ld. counsel for the assessee has raised elaborate arguments in support of the assessee’s case especially on the preliminary issue, it is observed that there was no compliance on the part of the assessee to the notices issued by the ld. CIT(Appeals) during the course of appellate proceedings fixing the appeal of the assessee for hearing from time to time and the ld. CIT(Appeals) thus had no occasion to consider the case of the assessee on merit either on the preliminary ./2016 Assessment year: 2006-2007 Page 3 of 3 issue involved in the case of the assessee relating to the validity of the assessment made by the Assessing Officer under section 147/143(3) or the other issues relating to both the additions made by the Assessing Officer to his total income. I, therefore, consider it fair and proper and in the interest of justice to set aside the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) ex-parte and remit the matter back to him for disposing of the appeal of the assessee afresh on merit after giving the assessee one more opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to make due compliance before the ld. CIT(Appeals) in order to enable him to dispose of the appeal expeditiously without any further delay.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on February 03, 2017.