IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
               DELHI BENCHES "A" : DELHI

     BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
                          AND
         SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

                  ITA.No.1816/Del./2017
                Assessment Year 2012-2013

Shri Bharat Anand,                The ACIT, Circle ­ 61 (1),
1, Jaipur Estate,                 20th Floor, E-2 Block,
Nizamuddin East,              vs. Civic Centre,
New Delhi ­ 110 013.              New Delhi ­ 110 002.
PAN AKYPA2495D
         (Appellant)                      (Respondent)

                For Assessee : Shri B.K. Anand, C.A.
                For Revenue : Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R.

              Date of Hearing : 06.02.2020
      Date of Pronouncement : 06.02.2020

                           ORDER

PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.

           This appeal by Assessee has been directed

against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-34, New Delhi, Dated

25.01.2017, for the A.Y. 2012-2013, challenging the levy of

penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961.


2.         We have heard the Learned Representative of

both the parties.
                               2
                                                 ITA.No.1816/Del./2017
                                          Shri Bharat Anand, New Delhi.



3.        The Ld. CIT(A) noted in the impugned order that

notices have been sent through registered post at the

address of the assessee which have not been returned back

un-served. The Ld. CIT(A), therefore, noted that assessee is

not interested in pursuing the appeal, therefore, it was

dismissed in limine.







4.        After considering the rival submissions, we are of

the view that the matter requires reconsideration at the level

of the Ld. CIT(A). According to Section 250(6) of the I.T. Act,

1961, the Ld. CIT(A) is required to mention point for

determination and reasons for decision in his appellate

order. Even if the assessee did not appear before Ld. CIT(A),

the Ld. CIT(A) should have to decide the appeal on merits

giving reasons for decision in the appellate order. However,

the Ld. CIT(A) simply dismissed the appeal of assessee for

non-prosecution. Therefore, the order cannot be sustained

in law.
                               3
                                                  ITA.No.1816/Del./2017
                                           Shri Bharat Anand, New Delhi.



5.         In view of the above, we set aside the impugned

order of Ld. CIT(A)-34, New Delhi and restore the appeal of

assessee to his file with a direction to re-decide the appeal of

assessee in accordance with law, giving reasons for decision

in the appellate order by giving reasonable and sufficient

opportunity of being heard to the assessee.







6.         In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed for

statistical purposes.


           Order pronounced in the open Court.

       Sd/-                             Sd/-
      (R.K. PANDA)                     (BHAVNESH SAINI)
 ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                    JUDICIAL MEMBER
Delhi, Dated 06th February, 2020
VBP/-
Copy to
1. The appellant
2. The respondent
3. CIT(A) concerned
4. CIT concerned
5. D.R. ITAT `A' Bench, Delhi
6. Guard File.

                        // BY Order //



         Assistant Registrar : ITAT Delhi Benches :
                           Delhi.