"G"                      

   IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "G"               BENCH,   MUMBAI
BEFORE S/SHRI H.L. KARWA, HON'BLE PRESIDENT AND N.K. BILLAIYA, AM

         .. ,                      .  .  ,                            

                        ./I.T.A. No.3775 /Mum/2013
                  (     /    Assessment Year : 2009-2010

   Mr. Gaurav P. Mody,     /                     Income Tax Officer ­
   1701/1702, Silver Oak     Vs.                 Ward 15(3)(3),
   Building,                                     Mumbai.
   Raheja Willows,
   Akruli Road,
   Kandivali (East),
   Mumbai ­ 400 101.
         . / PAN : AKSPMO686Q
        ( /Appellant)     ..                       (    / Respondent)

        Appellant by                 Shri Govind Javeri
        Respondent by :              Smt. Parminder
             / Date of Hearing                      : 20-08-2014
            /Date of Pronouncement : 20-08-2014
                                       [

                                / O R D E R
   PER N.K. BILLAIYA, A.M.                   :
   .    .  ,   

         This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of ld. CIT(A)-
   26, Mumbai dated 25-03-2013 pertaining to A.Y. 2009-10.

   2.    The assessee has raised five substantive grounds of appeal. The first
   grievance of the assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) has not considered the
   submissions and the evidences filed before him during the course of appellate
   proceedings.
                                     2      ITA 3775/M/13









3.     We have carefully perused the order of the authorities below. The
undisputed fact is that the assessment was framed u/s 144 of the Income
Tax Act, 1961 as the assessee did not comply with the notices of the A.O.
However, we find that during the course of the appellate proceedings, the
assessee did file certain documents along with written submissions. Those
were transmitted to the A.O. by the ld. CIT(A) calling for the remand report.
The A.O. submitted the remand report vide letter dated 11-3-2013.             The
assessee's contention is that he appeared before the A.O. on 20-3-2013,
22-3-2013 and 25-3-2013 but the A.O. never informed him that he has
already submitted the remand report on 13-3-2013. To substantiate this fact,
the assessee has filed an affidavit before us. We find that even the copy of the
remand report was not supplied to the assessee by the ld. CIT(A).
Considering all these facts in totality in the light of the affidavit filed by the
assessee, in our considered opinion, the issue needs to be re-adjudicated
afresh by the ld. CIT(A). We therefore restore this issue to the file of the ld.
CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) is directed to consider all the evidences afresh and also
furnish a copy of the remand report to the assessee. The assessee is directed
to file necessary details before the ld. CIT(A). The appeal filed by the assessee
is accordingly allowed for statistical purpose.

4.     In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical
purpose.

       Order pronounced in the open court on 20th August, 2014.

                               20-8-2014    



            Sd/-                                            sd/-
      (H.L. KARWA)                                   (N.K. BILLAIYA)
       /PRESIDENT                                ACCOUNTANT MEMBER


 Mumbai;            Dated       19-8-2014
                                             3    ITA 3775/M/13









                                             [



       . ../ R.K., Sr. PS


              /Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1.    / The Appellant
2.     / The Respondent.
3.     () / The CIT(A) 26, Mumbai
4.      / CIT- 15, Mumbai
5.           ,     ,  / DR, ITAT, Mumbai G Bench

6.     / Guard file.
                                                                    / BY ORDER,

                             //True Copy//
                                                        /  (Dy./Asstt.   Registrar)
                                                            ,  / ITAT, Mumbai