MUKESHKUMAR PUKHRAJ MEHTA,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER- WARD 8(3), PUNE

This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 12-02-2020 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Pune [„CIT(A)‟] for assessment year 2012-13 wherein the CIT(A) dismissed the appeals ex- parte of the assessee.

We find there was no representation on behalf of the assessee nor any application filed seeking adjournment. Thus, the assessee called absent and set ex-parte. Therefore, we proceed to dispose of the case by hearing the ld. DR and examining the material available on record.

We find that the assessee is an individual and engaged in the business of Trading in Tubes and Pipes fitting. The AO determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.22,95,665/- as against the returned income of Rs.13,98,661/-. Against the order of AO, the assessee challenged the same before the CIT(A) wherein we note that there was no opportunity for the assessee to prosecute the grounds raised in First Appellate proceedings.

We have perused the case records and heard the ld. DR. We find that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of non prosecution. It is, therefore, clear that rights and liabilities of the parties were not adjudicated upon on merits. We are of the considered view that one more opportunity needs to be given to the assessee to represent his case on merits so that justice can be delivered.

In view of the matter, we set aside the order of ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file for fresh adjudication after providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee. At the same time, we direct the assessee to present himself before the ld. CIT(A) with relevant documentary evidences, if any, to represent his case on merits.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.