SRI GOUTAM BAAG,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-11(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

The appellant filed appeals before CIT(A) against the orders passed on 13/11/2009 and 31/12/2010 for AY 04-05 & 05-06 respectively by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3)/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(Act).

Notice of hearing of appeal u/s 250 of the Act before the CIT(A) was issued on 27/02/2015 fixing of hearing on 25/03/2015. On the date of hearing none attended nor any written reply was received by the CIT(A) on behalf of the Assessee. Thereafter, fresh notices dated 28/05/2015, 24/006/2015 & 03/12/2015 respectively were issued but there was no compliance on the part of the Assessee.

The CIT(A) therefore dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non prosecution and confirmed the order of AO. Aggrieved by the orders of CIT(A) the assessee has preferred the present appeals before the Tribunal. . 118 & 119/Kol/2016-Sri Gautam Baag-A.Yrs.2004-05 & 2005-06 1

I have heard the rival submissions. The learned counsel for the assessee made a statement across the bar that his client had not received notice dated 03.12.2015 and that in respect of the earlier notice received, the assessee had personally appeared and attended the office of Commissioner of Income Tax but was informed that the appeals would be taken up later.

Keeping in mind the submissions made by the learned counsel for the assessee I am of the view that there was lack of opportunity afforded to the assessee before CIT(A). Accordingly the impugned orders of CIT(A) are set aside and CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeals of the assessee on merits after affording the assessee opportunity of being heard.

In the result the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.