, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH: CHENNAI , , BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 3350 /CHNY/ 201 9 / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 201 5 - 1 6 SHRI J. KARTHIKEYAN, U - 9, 4 TH MAIN ROAD, ANNA NAGAR, CHENN AI 600 0 4 0 . [PAN: A A NPK 9511D ] VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(4), NO.46, INVESTIGATION BUILDING, M.G. ROAD, NUNGAMBAKKAM , CHENNAI 600 034 ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : MR. S. SRIDHAR , ADVOCATE FOR MR. T. VASUDEVAN, ADVOCATE, /RESPONDENT BY : MR. J. PAVITHRAN KUMAR, JCIT / DATE OF HEARING : 30 . 01.2020 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30 . 01 .20 20 / O R D E R PER GEO RGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : TH IS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMIS SIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 1 6 , CHENNAI I N ITA NO. 01/CIT(A) - 18/2017 - 18 DATED 3 0 . 10 .2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 201 5 - 1 6 . ITA NO. 3350 /CHNY/201 9 : - 2 - : 2. MR. S. SRIDHAR , AD VOCATE FOR MR. T. VASUDEVAN, ADVOCATE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND MR. J. PAVITHRAN KUMAR, JCIT REPRE SENTED ON BEHALF OF THE R EVENUE . 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE THAT CERTAIN DETAILS HAD BEEN CALLED FOR BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ON 25.03.2019. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT ADEQUATE TIME HAD NOT BEEN GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE TO COMPLY WITH THE DETAILS CALLED FOR. IT WAS A PRAYER THAT THE ISSUES IN THE APPEAL MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF T HE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FOR RE - ADJUDICATION. 4. IN REPLY, THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER AND THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 5 . WE HAVE CONS IDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 6. A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) SHOWS THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) H AS IN PARA - 6.3 OF HIS ORDER RECORDED THA T DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING ON 25.03.2019, THE AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE WAS ASKED TO SPECIFICALLY FURNISH CERTAIN DETAILS. IT IS ALSO NOTICED THAT IN PARA - 4, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) RECORDED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED THE WRI TTEN SUBMISSION OF 25.03.2019. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF ITA NO. 3350 /CHNY/201 9 : - 3 - : INCOME TAX (APPEALS) SAYS THAT NO DETAILS HAVE BEEN PRODUCED TILL THE DATE OF PASSING OF THE ORDER. THE DATE OF THE ORDER IS 30.10.2019. WHAT TRANSPIRE D BETWEEN 25.03.2019 AND THE DATE OF THE ORDER, I.E. 30.10.2019 (NEARLY 7 MONTHS) IS NOT COMING OUT OF THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). WAS THERE ANY HEARING IN BETWEEN IS ALSO NOT COMING OUT OF THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL S). IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTICE, THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IS SET ASIDE AND THE ISSUES IN THE APPEAL ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) FOR RE - ADJUD ICATION AFTER GRANTING THE ASSESSEE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 7 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 3350 /CHNY/2019 IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30 TH JANUARY , 20 20 IN CHENNAI. SD/ - ( ) (INTURI RAMA RAO) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / CHENNAI, / DATED: 30 TH JANUARY , 2 020 IA, SR. PS SD/ - ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER / COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT 2. / RESPONDENT 3. ( ) / CIT(A) 4. / CIT 5. / DR 6. / GF