BAANI CAPITALS,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

This is assessee’s appeal against the order of the CIT (Appeals)-XXIV, New Delhi dated 30.09.2013 for the assessment year 2009-10.

At the outset, the ld. AR pointed out that the assessment order is framed u/s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) meaning the assessee could not attend the assessment proceedings before the AO, so he has passed order u/s 144 of the Act and in the impugned CIT (A)’s order also, the assessee could not participate because of the illness of the family member of the Director. Ld. AR brought to our attention the discharge summary from Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, Department of Nephrology. According to the ld. AR, non-participation before the AO / CIT (A) was 2 ITA No.2165/Del/2013 not deliberate but because of serious illness of the family member of the Director and so, the assessee should be given an opportunity to place facts and explain the AO the transactions in the correct perspective. The ld. AR undertakes to cooperate with the authorities and the ld. DR does not have any objection if the matter is remanded back to the AO but he wants the assessee to cooperate fully before the AO. The ld. AR agrees to the said condition made by the ld. DR.

We have heard both the parties and perused the record. We find that the AO has passed order u/s 144 of the Act as no one appeared before him and the impugned CIT(A)’s order was also passed ex-parte. Ld. AR took our attention to hospital bill of Sir Ganga Ram Hospital to support his contention that because of the illness of family member of the Director, the assessee could not participate in the proceedings before the AO and CIT (A). In the light of the said facts and in the interest of justice, we are inclined to set aside the impugned orders and remand the matter back to the file of the AO to be heard de novo and the assessment should be completed, of course after providing an opportunity to the assessee and the assessee should cooperate with the assessment proceedings.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on this 8th day of March, 2016.