SASTI COLLORRY KOYALA KHADAN KARMACHARI PAT SANSTHA vs. I.T.O. WARD -3, CHANDRAPUR

This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 22-03-2016 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Nagpur [‘CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2011-12.

We note that this appeal was filed with a delay of 234 days. On perusal of record, hearing the ld. DR and in view of disposal of appeal for non-prosecution by the CIT(A), the delay of 234 days are condoned.

At the time of hearing there was no appearance from the assessee nor through its representative and we observe that the order passed by the CIT(A) is an ex-parte order and liabilities of the assessee were not adjudicated upon. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of non-prosecution. After hearing the submissions of ld. DR wherein it is evident that neither the assessee nor its authorized representative attended and filed the details evidences in support of appeal on merits before the CIT(A) and the contention of ld. DR is that the CIT(A) offered may opportunities to the assessee and the assessee failed to avail the same. Therefore, the ld. DR vehemently opposed the prayer of providing any further opportunity to the assessee for representing its case on merits before the First Appellate Authority.

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 and we are of the considered view that one final opportunity needs to be given to the assessee to represent its case on merits. In view of the same, we set aside the order of ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to its file for fresh adjudication and decide the issues after providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is liberty to file evidences, if any, in support of its claim.

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