ITO WD. 18(1)(3), MUMBAI vs. SRI. MAYUR N. PARIKH, MUMBAI

None appeared on behalf of the assessee even though the case was adjourned on earlier occasion in the presence of both the parties. Hence, we proceed to dispose of the appeal ex parte, without the presence of the assessee.

We heard the ld. DR and perused the record. We noticed from the order sheet that the assessee has filed a rectification petition

2 Mayur N. Parikh ITA No. 7337/Mum/2007 before the ld. CIT(A) and the same is pending before him. We also noticed that the ld. CIT(A)-29, Mumbai has issued letter dt. 8.9.2014 to the concerned Assessing Officer stating that the rectification order can only be passed by an officer holding correct jurisdiction. The ld. DR submitted that the rectification application filed by the assessee would have impact on the issues urged before the Tribunal.

In view of the above, we are of the considered view that all the issues urged before us needs to be set aside to the file of the ld. CIT(A) so that he can adjudicate them afresh by duly considering the rectification application filed by the assessee. Accordingly, we restore all the issues urged before us to his file.

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.