IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1652/Del/2022 (Assessment Year : 2017-18) Hardcore Infotech Pvt. Ltd. 1, Zamrudpur Community Centre Kailash Colony, New Delhi – 110 048 PAN No. AAACH 8192 H Vs. ACIT Central Circle – 13 Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by --None-- Revenue by Shri Om Prakash, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing: 05.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 05.09.2022 ORDER PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 23.05.2022 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-26, New Delhi relating to Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Brief facts of the case as culled out from the material on record are as under :- 3. Assessee is a company stated to be engaged in trading, dealing, investment in shares and securities and is a NBFC Company to do financing business and electronically filed its return of income for A.Y. 2017-18 on 09.03.2018 declaring 2 income at Rs.6,101/-. The case was selected for scrutiny assessment through CASS and accordingly notices u/s 143(2) & 142(1) of the Act were issued. In response to the notices, assessee explained the return on e-portal. Thereafter, assessment was framed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 11.12.2019 determining the total income of Rs.20,88,701/-. 4. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before CIT(A) who vide order dated 23.05.2022 in Appeal No.10336/19-20 dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), assessee is now in appeal and has raised the following ground: 1. “Section 40A(3) is not attracted towards barter transactions.” 5. On the date of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment application was filed on its behalf though the file reveals that the notice of hearing was served on the assessee. In such a situation, I proceed to dispose of the appeal ex parte qua the assessee and after hearing the Learned DR. 6. Before me, Learned DR supported the order of AO. 7. I have heard the Learned DR and perused the material available on record. The perusal of CIT(A) order reveals that CIT(A) has passed an ex parte order without deciding the issue on merits. Sub Section (6) of Section 250 of I. T. Act mandate the CIT(A) to state the points in dispute and thereafter assign the 3 reasons in support of his conclusion. I am of the view that by dismissing the appeal without considering the issue on merits, Learned CIT(A) has failed to follow the mandate required in Sub Section (6) of Section 250 of the Act. Further it is also a well settled principle of natural justice that sufficient opportunity of hearing should be offered to the parties and no parties should be condemned unheard. In view of these facts, I set aside the impugned order of CIT(A) dated 23.05.2022 and restore the issue to the file of CIT(A) for re-adjudication of the issues after granting sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to furnish the details called for by the lower authorities. In view of the decision to restore the issue to CIT(A), I am not adjudicating on merits the grounds raised by the assessee. Thus the ground of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 05.09.2022, immediately after conclusion of the hearing of the matter in virtual mode. Sd/- (ANIL CHATURVEDI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Date:- 05.09.2022 PY* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI