9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 107X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ereinafter referred to as the "Ld. AO) u/s 144/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). 2. The brief facts are that present appellant was earlier known by name Dr Fresh Property Development Pvt ltd which was merged with Dr Fresh Health Care Pvt Ltd vide order dt 10.10.2014 passed by Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High court. M/s. Dr. Fresh Property Development Pvt. Ltd. filed the return of income at loss of Rs. 110048/- on 27-09-2010. The address of the said assessee was stated to be B-1/E-24 Mohan Co-operative Industrial Area, New Delhi. That, during the AY 2010-11 the said assessee 'Dr. Fresh Property Development Pvt. Ltd.' had purchased an immoveable property of Rs. 1,27,50,000/- on 19.02.2010. The said proper ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee and the Ld. Sr. DR. It was contended on behalf of the assessee by the Counsel that the order was passed ex parte based upon notices issued on incorrect address. 5. The Ld. Sr. DR submitted that the address of appellant before the FAA was "M/s. Dr. Fresh Health Care Pvt. Ltd., Village - Ghamroj, Gurgaon Sohna Road, Tehsil Sohna, Gurgaon, Haryana - 122102 and here also before the Tribunal the assessee has mentioned the same address while filing appeal in Form no. 36. Thus, he defended the orders of ld. AO and Ld. FAA. 6. Given thoughtful consideration to the submissions and the matter on record it can be observed that the assessment order dated 22.12.2017 was passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act. The notices u/s 148 and 142(1) were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ission and the Ld. FAA observed that, "despite fixing the case for hearing on various dates on the specific request of the appellant, no written submission has been made by the appellant in support of the grounds taken during the appeal. It appears that the appellant is not keen to pursue the appeal and no material/argument has been brought on record by the appellant against the order of the AO and in support of the grounds taken in appeal. Reference is made to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. BN Bhattacharya (1997) 118 ITR 461 (SC), in which the Hon'ble Apex Court while dealing with the issue of prosecution of appeal has stated that- "Preferring an appeal means more than formally filing it but effectively pursu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CH SEZ P. Ltd. has submitted that the ld. CIT(A) and Ld. AO both erred in passing ex parte order against the assessee without giving any opportunity of being heard. 10. The aforesaid discussion makes this Bench conclude that their appears to be some apparent mistake or ambiguity in the address of assessee upon which notices were served by the Ld. AO. Most likely due to merger and re-name of Assessee. The order of ld. First Appellate Authority indicate that only one notice was issued on 28.08.2018 and the same was also through e-mail and not by post while postal address of the assessee was shown to be of village Ghamroj, Gurgaon Sohna Road, Tehsil Sohna, Gurgaon, Haryana and there was specific ground of appeal before Ld. FAA that Ld. AO iss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
