AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This appeal by assessee has been directed against the order of Ld. CIT(Appeals)-Meerut dated 15.11.2017 for AY 2009-10, challenging the addition of Rs. 10,63,020/-.
The Ld. CIT(A) noted in the appellate order that initially assessee sought adjournment but thereafter, on various dates the assessee did not appear. It was, therefore, noted that the order of the AO remained uncontested. The order of the AO was confirmed and appeal of assessee was dismissed.
I have heard Ld. Representatives of both the parties and perused the impugned order. It appears that Ld. CIT(A) merely dismiss the appeal of assessee in default of the assessee. Ld. Counsel for assessee submitted that due to reasonable cause the assessee could not appear before AO on subsequent dates. He has also submitted that the order of Ld. CIT(A) is violative of section 250(6) of the Act. He has prayed that matter may be remanded back to the file of CIT(A) for fresh adjudication to which Ld. DR has no objection. According to section 250(6) of the Act, Ld. CIT(A) is required to mention point for determination and reasons for decision in the appellate order, even if, assessee did not appear before him to prosecute the appeal. The Ld. CIT(A), therefore, passed this order in violation of section 250(6) of the Act. The order of Ld. CIT(A), thus, cannot be sustained in law.
I, accordingly, set aside the appellate order and restore the appeal of assessee to the file of CIT(A) with direction to re-decide the appeal of assessee strictly on merits giving reasons for decision in the appellate order. Ld. CIT(A) shall give reasonable, sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court.