PROMILA,ROHTAK vs. ITO,WARD--3, ROHTAK

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order dated 09.03.2023 by NFAC, Delhi pertaining to A.Y.2014-15.

The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee is that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal by an exparte order for non appearance and further erred in confirming the addition of Rs.7 lacs made by the AO. 3. Representative of both the sides were heard at length. Case records carefully perused.

Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the return of income was selected for scrutiny assessment as per AIR/ CIB information received in respect of cash deposits in the bank account. The statutory notices were issued and served upon the assessee. On receiving no plausible reply the AO framed the assessment exparte and made the addition of Rs.7 lacs.

Assessee carried the matter before the CIT(A) but the proceeding before the appellate authority were not attended properly and the FAA dismissed the appeal by an exparte order. 6. We are of the considered view that the CIT(A) should have given some more opportunities of being heard to the assessee and should not have decided the appeal exparte. 7. In the interest of justice we restore this appeal to the files of the CIT(A). The CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeal afresh after affording a reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 8. Decision announced in the open court on 04.07.2023.