IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकरअपील./ITA No.79/SRT/2020 (Ǔनधा[रणवष[ / Assessment Years: (2009-10) (Virtual Court Hearing) Navinchandra Rajendrabhai Patel, Legal Heir of Rajendra Desaibhai Patel (Indv.), Patel Street, At & Post Vagra, Tal. Vagra, Dist. Bharuch-392140. Vs. The ITO, Ward-1(5), Bharuch. èथायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AMXPP4542R (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Mukund Bakshi, AR Revenue by: Ms Anupama Singla, Sr. DR स ु नवाईकȧतारȣख/ Date of Hearing : 14/03/2022 घोषणाकȧतारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 25/03/2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2009-10, is directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Vadodara [in short ‘ld. CIT(A)’], in Appeal No. CIT(A)-Vadodara-3/10521/2015-16 dated 26.11.2019, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) dated 27.02.2015. 2. At the outset itself, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that assessee died on 21.03.2019, when the appellate proceedings were going on before the ld. CIT(A), therefore assessee could not attend the hearing before the ld. CIT(A). Learned Counsel submitted that assessee has participated in appellate proceedings and took adjournment on 27.04.2018. However, assessee could not file elaborate submissions because before Ld. CIT(A), as the assessee died while the proceeding was going on before the ld. CIT(A), therefore Learned Counsel Page | 2 ITA No.79/SRT/2020 Assessment Year. 2009-10 Navinchandra R. Patel contended that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before the ld. CIT(A). 3. Learned Departmental Representative (ld. DR) for the Revenue debarred from objecting the stand of the Learned Counsel. 4. Considering the above facts, we note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A). Besides, Ld. CIT(A) did not adjudicate the assessee’s appeal on merit. We note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced on 25/03/2022 by placing result on notice board. Sd/- Sd/- (PAWAN SINGH) (Dr. A.L. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER lwjr /Surat / Ǒदनांक/ Date: 25/03/2022 SAMANTA Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR/AR, ITAT, Surat 6. Guard File By Order // TRUE COPY // Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Surat