TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 953X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and served on the assessee on 01.11.2011, the very same day the assessment order was passed. However, on what basis the CIT(A) has come to the conclusion that the assessment order was dispatched on 01.11.2011 and served on the assessee on the very same day is not forthcoming from the record. No such opportunity has been given to the assessee to explain the case. In the aforesaid circumstances, we are of the view that the order passed by the CIT(A) is in violation of rules of natural justice. Accordingly, we are inclined to set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remit the matter back to his file for considering the issue afresh after giving a fair opportunity of being heard to the assessee. If it is found from record that the assessment o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1,670/-. The assessee challenged the assessment order so passed by preferring an appeal before the CIT(A). As it appears from the order of the CIT(A), on perusal of the memorandum of appeal filed in form no.35, he noticed that assessee has mentioned the date of receipt of the assessment order as 28.5.2012. However, on examining the assessment order, the CIT(A) noted that not only the assessment order was passed on 01.11.2011, but the same was also dispatched on the very same day i.e. 01.11.2011. He therefore concluded that it is beyond human probability that the assessment order, which was dispatched on 01.11.2011 could only be served on the assessee on 28.5.2012. He therefore was of the opinion that the date of receipt noted by the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d assessment year has been passed, she applied for a copy of the order and only after receiving the same on 28.5.2012, the appeal was filed before the CIT(A) on 31.5.2012. Hence, it is the contention of the Ld. A.R. that there is no delay in filing the appeal and the CIT(A) was not justified in dismissing assessee s appeal ex-parte in limini on the ground of delay without properly appreciating the facts and without giving an opportunity to the assessee to explain his case. 4. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand relied on the order of the CIT(A). 5. We have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the impugned order of the CIT(A) as well as other materials on record. As can be seen from the facts and materials on record, the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
