AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Bhavnesh Saini, J
This appeal by Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-4, Kanpur, Dated 12.11.2018, for the A.Y. 2015-2016.
I have heard the Learned Representatives of both the parties.
The Ld. CIT(A) noted that he has issued several notices to the assessee for hearing of the appeal, but, he has not bothered to attend the hearing or to file any written submissions. It is noted in the impugned order that notice have been sent through email at address of the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) in the absence of any representation from the side of the assessee, dismissed the appeal of assessee for want of prosecution as well as dismissed the appeal on merit because of non-appearance of the assessee.
After considering the rival submissions, I am of the view that the matter requires reconsideration at the level of the Ld. CIT(A). Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that no notice have been received by assessee at the email as is mentioned in the impugned order. Further, the additions on merit have not been decided, therefore, it is violative of Section 250(6) of the I.T. Act, 1961. The Ld. D.R. suggested that the matter could be remanded to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh decision. In view of the above, it is clear that principles of natural justice have not been followed in this case. Therefore, I set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the appeal of assessee to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to re-decide the appeal of assessee on merit, by giving reasonable, sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decide the appeal strictly on merits.
In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed for statistical purposes.