TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 635X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lso hereby directed to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) and substantiate his case failing which, the Ld. CIT(A) is at liberty to pass appropriate order, as per law. No grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. - ITA Nos. 3524 And 3525/DEL/2019 - - - Dated:- 25-11-2020 - Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member And Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Sh. Subhash Gupta, CA For the Revenue : Sh. Ajay Kumar, Sr. DR. ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM: The above 02 appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the common exparte order dated 25.02.2019 of the Ld. CIT(A)-20, New Delhi for the assessment year 2013-14 and 2014-15 respectively. Since common issues are involved ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ounds raised by the assesseee in the assessment year 2014-15 are as under:- On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirm addition of ₹ 3185194/- income from compensation received against acquisition agriculture. On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) passed exparte appeal order without consider submission made by appellant before CIT(A) and without grant proper reasonable opportunity to appellant against the principal of natural justice passed the appeal order without merit of the case. On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirm addition of ₹ 3185194/- income from compensation received against acquisition agricultur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5. The Assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, despite issuance of statutory notices, the assessee did not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) for which the Ld. CIT(A) in the common exparte order passed by her sustained the additions made by the AO. 5.1 Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submitted that sufficient opportunity was not granted by the Ld. CIT(A) for hearing of the case. Further, the Ld. CIT(A) while deciding the issue has followed the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del.), the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. BN Bhattacharya 118 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
