WATERMARK FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 3(3), MUMBAI

आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These appeals have been filed by the Assessee against the separate orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), {(in short ‘CIT(A)’}, for the Assessment Years 2007-

3.1. It is noted by us that Ld. CIT(A) had passed the order ex- parte. It is further noted by us that all these orders have been passed by the Ld. CIT(A) by dismissing the appeal of assessee ‘in limini’. It is noted that these appeals were not disposed on merits. No discussion at all has been made by the Ld. CIT(A) in the order. As per law, Ld. CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits. It is further noted by us that in the penalty orders also proper representation does not appear to have been made by the assessee. Under these circumstances, we find that justice has not been granted in these cases. Thus, taking into account totality of all these facts and circumstances, we find it appropriate to send all these appeals back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for their adjudication on merits. The Ld. CIT(A) shall give adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee after properly serving the notice at the correct address of the assessee company. The assessee shall

3 Watermark financial consultants also extend requisite cooperation to Ld. CIT(A) by making proper representation of these cases. The Ld. CIT(A) shall decide these appeals on merits, objectively, after taking into account all the details and evidences and other submissions as may be filed by the assessee. Thus, with these directions, these appeals are sent back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to be decided on merits after hearing the assessee.

Order pronounced in the open court on 31st May , 2016.