M/S GARGO ELECTRICALS,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-34(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

None appeared on behalf of the Revenue. Therefore, we dispose of the appeal on merit after hearing the Ld. AR of the assessee and perusing the material available on record.

It was submitted by the Ld.AR for the assessee that the AO made the additions u/Sec’s. 68 and 40(a)(ia)r.w.s 194A of the Act and determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.6,94,610/- against M/s. Gargo Electricals 1 which the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A), wherein he confirmed the additions for non appearance of the assessee.

We have heard the Ld.AR for the assessee and perused the material available on record. It is noticed from the impugned order that the CIT-A has given many opportunities to the assessee, but, the assessee could not appear before him to prosecute its case. The Ld. AR before us submitted that the assessee has engaged Mr. R.S Singh, FCA to prosecute the appeal and accordingly the assessee was under the impression that the Counsel must be looking after the matter before the CIT-A. However, on receipt of the order of the CIT-A the assessee came to know that the Counsel did not pursue the matter before the CIT-A. However, the assessee immediately changed the Counsel and file the appeal before the Tribunal. The Ld.AR further humbly requested to dispose off the matter to the CIT-A for fresh adjudication and assured to attend the proceeding before the CIT-A. An affidavit was filed to that effect in support of the contention above. Having perused the same, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of the Ld.AR as submitted before us and in the interest of justice, we deem it fit and proper to remand the case to the file of the CIT-A for fresh adjudication as per law. The assessee shall be at liberty to file requisite evidences, if any, to substantiate its claim. The assessee is also directed to co-operate in further appellate proceedings without seeking any further adjournment.