1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI P.K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.333/LKW/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2), BAREILLY VS SHRI MAN SINGH, BIHAR MAN NAGLA, BAREILLY - 243122 PAN CVYPS 8562 E (RESPONDENT) (APPELLANT) NONE APPELLANT BY SHRI AMIT NIGAM, DR RESPONDENT BY 26/07/2016 DATE OF HEARING 29 / 0 7 /201 6 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT O R D E R PER: MAHAVIR PRASAD, JM. THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON VARIOUS GROUNDS. 2. THIS APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING ON 26.07.2016, BUT NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. ON A CAREFUL PERUSAL OF THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES IN THE LIGHT OF THE GROUNDS R AISED IN THE APPEAL, WE FIND THAT THIS APPEAL CAN BE DISPOSED OF EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL WAS HEARD EX-PART E. 3. LD. DR PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A). 4. HAVING CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A ) IN THE AFORESAID CASE, WE FIND THAT THE CIT(A) HAS SIMPLY RECORDED I N HIS SECOND PARA DIFFERENT DATES OF HEARING FIXED BY HIM BUT HE HAS NOT RECORDED CATEGORICALLY WITH RESPECT TO SERVICE OF NOTICE OF HEARING. IN TH E LIGHT OF THESE FACTS, WE 2 ARE OF THE VIEW THAT CIT(A) HAS NOT AFFORDED PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. WE, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO HIS FILE WITH THE DIRECT ION TO READJUDICATE THE APPEAL AFRESH ON MERIT AFTER AFFORDING OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SD/- SD/- (P.K. BANSAL) (MAHAVIR PRASAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 29/07/2016 AKS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1.THE APPELLANT 2.THE RESPONDENT. 3.CONCERNED CIT 4.THE CIT(A) 5.D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASSTT. REG ISTRAR