9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 109X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n section 250 of the Act – thus, the matter is remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication – Decided in favour of Assessee. - I.T.A. No.2793/Mum/2013, I.T.A. No.2794/Mum/2013 - - - Dated:- 18-7-2014 - Shri H. L. Karwa And P. M. Jagtap, AM,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Rahul K. Hakani For the Respondent : Shri Prakash L. Pathede ORDER Per P. M. Jagtap, A. M. Thes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onsidering detail on the record of the assessing officer. 3. Commissioner of I.T. (A) erred in not considering that AO has mechanically made addition without considering the details and evidence of investment provided by assessee during the assessment proceeding. 4. Commissioner of I.T. (A) erred in not considering that AO has not provided appellant with the various evidence relied upon by h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... parte vide his impugned order dated 7-1-2013 for want of prosecution without deciding the issue involved therein on merit. As per the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 250 of the Act, it is incumbent upon the CIT(A) to dispose of the appeal filed by the assessee by an order in writing stating therein the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for such decision. The ld ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... As regards the appeal of the other assessee being ITA No. 2793/Mum/2013, it is observed that the said appeal has been dismissed by the ld. CIT(A) vide an appellate order dated 31-1-2013 passed ex-parte for want of prosecution as well as on merit. As noted from the said order, the ld. CIT(A) in this case also appears to have not afforded proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
