IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                  (DELHI BENCH `G' : NEW DELHI)
    BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
                                     AND
           Dr. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
                  ITA No.6520/Del./2016, A.Y. 2012-13

  S.S.Digital Point Pvt. Ltd.,            Vs.         ITO,
  Delhi-110092                                       Ward-22(1),
                                                      New Delhi
  (APPELLANT)                                        (RESPONDENT)

  ASSESSEE BY : Sh. Gurjeet Singh, Adv.
  REVENUE BY : Shri Saras Kumar, Sr. DR

  Date of Hearing : 20.01.2020
  Date of Order   : 29.01.2020


                                  ORDER

PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER :

            The    appellant     S.S.Digital    Point   Pvt.    Ltd.,   Delhi

  (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee') by filing the aforesaid

  appeal, sought to set aside the impugned order dated 09/11/2016

  passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-17, New

  Delhi qua the Assessment Year 2012-13 on the grounds inter alia

  that :

     1. "Because the action is under challenge on facts & law since
        the findings recorded qua appeal dismissal is in violation to the
        principles of natural & substantial justice for a decision in
        accordance with law.
     2. Because the action is being challenged on facts & law, for
        upholding the addition of Rs. 39,69,861 for not substantiating
                                       2              ITA No. 6520/Del./2016

        the claims of creditors/credit balances & treating the same as
        unexplained income from undisclosed sources.
     3. Because the action is being challenged on facts & law, for
        making the addition amounting Rs. 3,150/- on account of
        interest received u/s 244A.

       PRAYER
               For any consequential relief and/ or legal claim
        arising out of this appeal and for any addition, deletion,
        amendment and modification in the grounds of appeal before
        the disposal of the same in the interest of substantial justice to
        the assessee."






4.           Briefly stated the facts necessary for adjudication of the

controversy at hand are : assessee company is into business of

Digital Printing and Digital Fabrication. Assessing Officer made

addition of Rs. 39,69,861/- and               Rs. 3510/- on account of

disallowances of expenses and framed the assessment at Rs.

57,77,010/- u/s 143(3)/ 144 of the Income Tax Act.

5.          Assessee carried the matter before Ld. CIT(A) by way of

filing the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who has dismissed appeal ex

parte. Feeling aggrieved the assessee has come up before the

Tribunal by way of filing the present appeal.

6.          We have heard the ld. Authorized Representatives of the

parties to the appeal, gone through the documents relied upon and

orders passed by the revenue authorities below in the light of the

facts and circumstances of the case.

7.         At the very outset the Ld. AR for the assessee contended

that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the order at the back of assessee
                                3           ITA No. 6520/Del./2016

without providing opportunity of being heard and the assessee has

never received the notice allegedly issued by Ld. CIT(A) and

made a request for providing opportunity of being heard.






8.       Perusal of the impugned order passed by Ld. CIT(A) goes

to prove that pursuant to the notice dated 19.07.2016 issued by Ld.

CIT(A), adjournment application was moved by the assessee and

case was adjourned to 31.08.2016 and again request for

adjournment was received and case was adjourned to 18.10.2016

on which date another requests for adjournment was received and

ultimately case adjourned to 08.11.2016 on which date none

appeared on behalf of the assessee. No doubt the assessee is at

fault to argue its appeal before Ld. CIT(A) but to decide the issue

once for all on merits, we are of the considered view that in the

interest of justice one more opportunity is required to be given to

the assessee. Consequently impugned order passed by Ld. CIT(A)

is set aside and case is remanded back to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide

afresh after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the

assessee, hence, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for

statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in open court on this 29th January, 2020.

        Sd/-                                    Sd/-
 (B.R.R.KUMAR)                             (KULDIP SINGH)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                         JUDICIALMEMBER
                              4           ITA No. 6520/Del./2016


Dated :    /01/2020
*BR*
Copy forwarded to:
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(A)-17, New Delhi.
5. CIT(ITAT), New Delhi.
                                              AR, ITAT
                                             NEW DELHI



Date of dictation                                20.01.2020
Date on which the typed draft is placed before 20.01.2020
the dictating Member
Date on which the typed draft is placed before
the Other Member
Date on which the approved draft comes to the
Sr. PS/PS
Date on which the fair order is placed before
the Dictating Member for pronouncement
Date on which the fair order comes back to the
Sr. PS/PS
Date on which the final order is uploaded on
the website of ITAT
Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk
Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk
The date on which the file goes to the Assistant
Registrar for signature on the order
Date of dispatch of the Order