THIRUMALA EARTH MOVERS,GAJWEL vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-9(1), HYDERABAD

At the outset, the learned AR submitted that proper notices were not served on the assessee as required under section 282 of the Income tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) read with Rule 127 of the Rules. Learned AR further submitted the notices were served to the assessee’s earlier learned AR which has not been brought to the notice of the assessee to put forth his case. He, therefore prayed to remand the matter back to the file of the learned CIT(A) to afford an opportunity of being heard to the assessee, keeping in view the principles of natural justice.

As a matter of fact, though the learned DR does not concede to remand the matter back to the file of the learned CIT(A), there is no denial of the fact that the assessee does not stand to gain by allowing the appeals to be decided ex-parte, on the other hand, such a thing will add to the misery of the assessee in the form of litigation expenses before the Tribunal. It, therefore, occurs to our mind that the plea of the assessee that the notices were not served on the assessee as required under section 282 of the Act, is genuine one. Keeping in view the principles of natural justice, we remand both the quantum as well as the penalty appeals to the file of the learned CIT(A) to afford an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decide the issue along with quantum appeal pending before the learned CIT(A). Accordingly, appeals of the assessee are allowed for the statistical purpose.

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on this the 11th day of September, 2024.