2024 (5) TMI 766

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2018-19 and arises out of the assessment order under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred as 'the Act'] . 2. The relevant facts as culled from the material on records are as under : 3. Assessee is a private limited company who electronically filed its return of income on 17.10.2018 for A.Y. 2018-19 declaring an income of Rs. 1,42,380/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS for the reason "assessee has made substantial purchases from suppliers who are either Non-Filer(s) or have filed non-business ITR or reflected a substantially lower turnover in ITR as compared to turnover shown in GSTR 1 return". Thereafter, assessment was framed u/s 144 r.w.s 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Act....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....stances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as much as in fact while passing the impugned order as the Ld. CIT(A) have failed to appreciate the fact that during the period of appeal proceedings the appellant could not reply to the notices issued by the CIT(A) due to the reasons beyond his control and also due to the health issues being faced by the director of the assessee company. 4. That under the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as much as in fact while passing the impugned order, as the Ld. CIT(A) has upheld the addition made by the Ld. AO in the assessment order dt. 06.04.2021 passed without following the due provisions of law and without having proper jurisdiction. 5. That u....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... has not appeared which shows the callous approach of the assessee. He, therefore, submitted that order of CIT(A) be upheld. 7. We have heard the learned DR and perused the material available on record. The perusal of CIT(A) order reveals that CIT(A) has passed an ex parte order without deciding the issue on merits. Sub Section (6) of Section 250 of I. T. Act mandate the CIT(A) to state the points in dispute and thereafter assign the reasons in support of his conclusion. We are of the view that by dismissing the appeal without considering the issue on merits, learned CIT(A) has failed to follow the mandate required in Sub Section (6) of Section 250 of the Act. Further it is also a well settled principle of natural justice that sufficient....