SEEMA NARANG,FARIDABAD HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(3), FARIDABAD HARYANA

At the outset, from the perusal of the order of Ld. CIT(A), it is seen that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned orders ex-parte without providing sufficient opportunities of being heard to the assessee, thereby confirming the additions made by the AO. The assessee in ground of appeal No.10 for Ay 2015-16 and Ground of appeal No. 14 in AY 2016-17 has challenged the orders of CIT(A) for not providing reasonable opportunities of being heard and passed the order exparte.

Heard the parties and considered the facts of the case. From the perusal of orders of Ld. CIT(A), it clearly shows that the Ld. CIT(A) has provided many opportunities and the assessee did not submit any written submission/reply. In this background that the CIT(A) proceeded to disposed off the appeals filed by the assessee by confirming the additions made by the AO in the assessment orders. It is true that assessee did not comply with the notices issued by the CIT(A) and did not file the requisite details/documents in support of the claim made in grounds of appeals.

1. 5. Under these facts and circumstances and in the interest of justice, we set aside the orders of ld. CIT(A) in both the appeals and restored the same to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits in accordance with law after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to participate in the appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) for both the assessment years.