9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1346X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Ld. CIT(A) was of the bona fide belief that AY 2009-10 would be adjudicated first and thereafter only AY 2011-12 would be adjudicated. Therefore, at that time he was not prepared to argue the brief entrusted to him so, we are of the opinion that no proper opportunity was given to the Ld. AR of the assessee to effectively plead its case before the First Appellate Authority, therefore, we are incl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee had filed the first appeal, the jurisdiction was vested with the Ld. CIT(A) 12 for AY 2009-10 and since the assessee had filed documents and submission before the Ld. CIT(A) -12, the Ld. CIT(A) had called for the remand report from the AO. However, the AO did not send any remand report. Meanwhile, the jurisdiction got changed from Ld. CIT(A) 12 to Ld. CIT(A) 4 and the assessee r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tly with all supporting relevant documents so that the Ld. CIT(A) can effectively hear and dispose of the appeal. 3. We have heard rival submissions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We note that the main grievance of the Ld. AR of the assessee is that no effective hearing happened before the Ld. CIT(A) while adjudicating the appeal for AY 2009-10. The aforesaid f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erefore, we are inclined to set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the appeals afresh. Therefore, both the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 4. In the result, both the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. (Order is pronounced in the open court on 01/05/2019) - - T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
