THE KOSAMBA MERCANTILE CO-OP. BANK LTD.,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, BARDOLI

During the appellate proceedings, the assessee did not receive the notices of hearings, therefore could not attend the appellate proceedings before Ld. CIT(A), hence Ld. Counsel contended that another opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before the Assessing Officer.

On the other hand, Learned Departmental Representative (Ld. DR) for the Revenue did not have any objection if the matter is remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication.

Considering the above facts, we note that assessee could not plead his case successfully before the Assessing Officer. We also note that Assessing Officer passed the order as per the provisions of section 144 of the Act, “Best judgment assessment”. That is Assessing Officer did not pass order on merit. Hence, we are of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before the Assessing Officer We note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed.

ITA.201/SRT/2023/AY.2011-12 The Kosamba Merchantile Co.op Bank Ltd. 6. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.