, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BE NCH, MUMBAI , !' $ $ $ $ % & ' , !' ( BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./I .T.A. NO.1821/MUM/2013 ( ) ) ) ) / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 LATE MOHANCHANDRA TRIPATHI THROUGH HIS LEGAL HEIR MRS. JYOTI TRIPATHI, A/2/15 ASMITA JYOTI CHSL, CHARKOP NAKA, MARVE ROAD MALAD (W), MUMBAI-400 095 / VS. THE ITO 24(2)4, PRATYAKSHKAR BHAVAN, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, '* ./ +, ./ PAN/GIR NO. : AAAPT 9808P ( *- / APPELLANT ) .. ( ./*- / RESPONDENT ) *- 0 / APPELLANT BY: SHRI ANIL THAKKRAR ./*- 1 0 / RESPONDENT BY: SHRI VIVEK BATRA 1 %2 / DATE OF HEARING :10.12.2014 34) 1 %2 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT :10.12.2014 !& / O R D E R PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM: THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-34, MUMBAI DT.22.6.2012 PERTAINING TO A.Y.20 07-08. 2. AT THE VERY OUTSET, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSE SSEE STATED THAT THE ASSESSMENT ORDER HAS BEEN MADE U/S. 144 OF THE ACT BECAUSE THE ASSESSEE ITA NO. 1821/M/2013 2 HAS EXPIRED AND THE LEGAL HEIR WHICH IS THE WIDOW O F THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT AWARE OF THE BUSINESS INTRICACIES OF THE DECEASED H USBAND AND THEREFORE THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS COULD NOT BE ATTENDED PR OPERLY. THE ASSESSEE COULD FURNISH DOCUMENTS BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) BUT A GAIN THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT ATTEND THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS. THE LD. C OUNSEL PLEADED THAT IF ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY IS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE, THE NECESSARY DETAILS/DOCUMENTS/EXPLANATIONS WOULD BE FILED. 3. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE STRONGLY OBJ ECTED TO THIS. IT IS THE SAY OF THE LD. DR THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAD GI VEN SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES TO THE ASSESSEE AND EVEN IN THE REM AND PROCEEDINGS THE AO HAS GIVEN REASONABLE OPPORTUNITIES TO THE ASSESS EE TO SUBSTANTIATE HIS CLAIM. 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE ORDERS OF THE AUTH ORITIES BELOW. IT IS AN UNDISPUTED FACT THAT THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WERE NOT ATTENDED, THE AO HAD TO MAKE THE ORDER U/S. 144 OF THE ACT. IT I S ALSO AN UNDISPUTED FACT THAT WHEN THE MATTER WAS REMANDED TO THE AO BY THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE DID NOT ATTEND THE REMAND PROCEEDINGS. HO WEVER, CONSIDERING THE FACTS IN TOTALITY SPECIFICALLY ASSESSEE IS SINC E DECEASED AND THE LEGAL HEIR BEING WIDOW SHOULD GET ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT/DEFEND BEFORE THE AO. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTI CE AND FAIR PLAY, WE SET ASIDE THE ENTIRE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR DE NOVO ASSESSMENT. THE AO IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH AFTER GIV ING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BEFORE US HAS G IVEN AN UNDERTAKING THAT THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS WILL BE WELL ATTENDED. IT HAS BEEN MADE VERY CLEAR TO THE LD. COUNSEL IF THE ASSE SSMENT PROCEEDINGS ITA NO. 1821/M/2013 3 ARE NOT PROPERLY ATTENDED STATUS-QUO SHALL BE MAINT AINED. WITH THE ABOVE OBSERVATION, WE SET ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE AO. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 10 TH DECEMBER, 2014 SD/- SD/- (AMIT SHUKLA ) (N.K. BILLAIYA) !' /JUDICIAL MEMBER !' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; 5! DATED : 10 TH DECEMBER, 2014 . . ./ RJ , SR. PS !& !& !& !& 1 11 1 .% .% .% .% 6)% 6)% 6)% 6)% / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. *- / THE APPELLANT 2. ./*- / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 7 ( ) / THE CIT(A)- 4. 7 / CIT 5. 89 .% , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 9: ; / GUARD FILE. !& !& !& !& / BY ORDER, /% .% //TRUE COPY// < << < / = = = = + + + + (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI