JAGDISHCHANDER KAPUR,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ITO-WD 22(3)(2), NAVI MUMBAI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER (A.Y:2009-10) Jagdishchander Kapur, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-22(3)(2), 3rd Floor, 6th 10A, Natraj Chs. Ltd., Plot No.15, Sector -4, Sanpada, Navi Mumbai Tower, Vashi, Vashi Railway PIN 400 705 Station Complex, Navi Mumbai 400 703 PAN: AFZPK 1805 R Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by .. Ms. Arackal Abitha, AR .. Respondent by Shri K. L. Kanak, Sr. DR Date of hearing .. 11-08-2016 .. Date of pronouncement 11-08-2016 O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM:

This appeal by the assessee is arising out of order of CIT (A)-33, Mumbai in Appeal No. CIT (A)-33/IT/374/13-14 dated 31-12-2014. Assessment was framed by ITO-22(3)(2), Mumbai for assessment year 2009-10 u/s 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) vide his order dated 04-03-2013.

by the assessee that the order of the CIT (A) is ex-parte order and the CIT (A) dismissed the appeal for non-attendance by applying the decision of the Delhi Bench of this Tribunal in the case of CIT Vs Multiplan India Ltd.

38. ITD 320 (Del.). Assessee’s representative Ms. Arackal Abitha who is a Chartered Accountancy student of final year stated that the CIT (A) cannot apply the decision in the case of Multiplan India Ltd. and he has to pass orders on merit. On query from the Bench, the learned Sr. DR only requested that the matter can be remitted to the file of the AO.

and also has to record the reasons as to why the contentions have been rejected or accepted. Here the appellate authority while disposing off the appeal by its order did not at all consider the points in proper perspective without discussing the issue raised and without recording the reasons as to why the contentions have been rejected or accepted, the appeal can be said to have been disposed off in a most casual and caviler manner. In the present case, same is the situation. Therefore, I set aside the order of the CIT (A) and restore the matter back to the file of the CIT (A) for fresh adjudication after allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and for passing a speaking and reasoned order. In terms of the above, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.