Shri Ram Chandra, Kanpur vs Assessee

Shri. Ram Chandra v. Income Tax Officer 3(3) 105/701, Anand Bagh Kanpur Kanpur TAN/PAN:AAJPC2782J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Appellant by: Shri. Abhinav Mehrotra, Advocate Respondent by: Shri. V. S. Nego, D.R. Date of hearing: 17 04 2015 Date of pronouncement: 24 04 2015

ORDER

PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV:

This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), inter alia, on the following grounds:-

1. That the Ld. CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in approving the action of the Assessing Officer by sustaining the addition of Rs.4000/-.

2. That the Ld. CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in approving the action of the Assessing Officer by sustaining the addition of Rs.2000/-.

3. That the Ld. CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in approving the action of the Assessing Officer by sustaining the addition of Rs.4000/-.

4. That the Ld. CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in approving the :-2-:

action of the Assessing Officer by sustaining the addition of Rs.2232/-.

5. That the Ld. CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in approving the action of the Assessing Officer by sustaining the addition of Rs.2,49,900/-, particularly because the evidence was procured behind the back of the assessee and the assessee was never confronted to the same and even otherwise there cannot be any addition of trade creditors once the books of account of the assessee are accepted.

6. That the Ld. CIT (A) proceeded with the matter in ex-party manner without appreciating the difficulty of the assessee in putting in appearance before the same, as the notices of hearing were not received by the assessee.

7. Because the order passed by Ld. CIT (A), on this count is bad in law.

8. The Appellant craves for leave to add/amend the grounds of appeal, with the permission, of the Honble Bench.

2. During the course of hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has disposed of the appeal ex-parte without affording opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Therefore, the order of the ld. CIT(A) may kindly be set aside and the matter may be restored to his file for re-adjudication of the appeal.

3. The ld. D.R. has placed reliance upon the order of the ld. CIT(A).

4. Having carefully examined the order of the ld. CIT(A), we find that none appeared on behalf of the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) though the ld. CIT(A) has issued notices, but the ld. CIT(A) has not recorded any finding with regard to the valid service of notice of hearing upon the :-3-:

assessee. The ld. CIT(A) has decided the appeal ex-parte and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Since the ld. CIT(A) has adjudicated the appeal without affording opportunity of being heard to the assessee, we set aside his order and restore the matter to his file with a direction to re-adjudicate the appeal afresh after affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to extend all sorts of co-operation to the ld. CIT(A) in disposal of the appeal.

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

Order was pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the captioned page.

Sd/- Sd/- [A. K. GARODIA] [SUNIL KUMAR YADAV] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

DATED:24th April, 2015 JJ:1704

Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR Assistant Registrar