DILIP G. MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 18(2)(2), MUMBAI

PER AMARJIT SINGH, JM:

This is an appeal against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-29, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as the “learned CIT(A)”] dated 07.02.2013 relevant to the A.Y. 2009-10. 2. The sole point which has been raised by the appellant that the additional grounds which have been taken by him in his letter dated 20.07.2012 and letter dated 04.08.2012 and letter dated 24.08.2012 have not be adjudicated by the learned CIT(A) without any reasonable cause. The order passed by the learned CIT(A) speaks that the additional grounds which have been taken by the ITA No.3869/M/13 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Avery Cycles Inds Ltd. Vs. CIT(292 ITR 493) (P&H). Therefore in the said circumstances we are of the view that declining the additional grounds for adjudication by the learned CIT(A) is not justifiable. Therefore without commenting upon the merits of the case we set aside the order of learned CIT(A) and direct the learned CIT(A) to adjudicate the additional grounds which has been raised by the assessee in his letter dated 20.07.2012, 04.08.2012 and 24.08.2012 in accordance with law after giving proper and full opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Therefore the appeal is hereby ordered to restored before learned CIT(A) for compliance. So far as the other grounds are concern, since the main grievance of the assessee is in connection with the adjudication of additional grounds, therefore the other grounds became academic in nature and would be futile exercise to decide.

Order pronounced in the open court on 23rd December, 2015 (AMARJIT SINGH) (N.K.BILLAIYA) लेखा सद"य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER "या"यक सद"य/JUDICIAL MEMBER मुंबई Mumbai; "दनांक Dated : 23rd December, 2015 MP MP MP MP Assessment Year: 2009-10

आदेश क" ""त"ल"प अ"े"षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ" / The Appellant