,                  ""          
      IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "C" BENCH, MUMBAI

BEFORE HON'BLE S/SHRI H.L. KARWA, PRESIDENT AND B.R.BASKARAN (AM)
         .. ,                           .. ,   
                    ./I.T.A. No.21/Mum/2011
                 (   / Assessment Year :2005-06)

  Percept Advertising Ltd.,      /       Addl. Commissioner of Income
  22, Raghuvanshi Estate,        Vs.     Tax ­Range 7(1)
  11/12 Senapati Bapat Marg,             Aayakar Bhavan,
  Lower Parel,                           M.K.Road,
  Mumbai-400013                          Mumbai-400020
        ( /Appellant)             ..     (    / Respondent)


               . /   . / PAN/GIRNo. :AAACP5689F

            / Appellant by             : Shri Bhupendra Shah
              /Respondent by             Shri Premanand J


             / Date of Hearing
                                               :31.12.2014
            /Date of Pronouncement : 16.01.2015

                               / O R D E R

 Per B.R.BASKARAN, Accountant Member:

       The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 21-
 01-08 passed by Ld CIT(A)-13, Mumbai and it relates to the assessment
 year 2005-06.

 2.    The Ld A.R submitted that the assessee could not appear before the
 Ld CIT(A) in the appellate proceedings and hence the Ld CIT(A) has
 passed the order ex-parte, without hearing the assessee.      The Ld A.R
 submitted that the assessee could not appear before the first appellate
 authority for the reasons beyond his control.      He submitted that the
 assessee would be in a position to represent its case properly before the
 Ld CIT(A), if one more opportunity is given to it. He further submitted
                                                                       21/M/2011
                                       2







that the assessee would be put to great loss, if the opportunity is not
given.     Accordingly he prayed that the matters be set aside to the file of
the Ld CIT(A) for fresh consideration.

3.       The Ld D.R did not object to the request made by Ld A.R.

4.       Having regard to the submissions made by Ld A.R, we are of the
view that the assessee, in the interest of natural justice, should be given
one more opportunity to represent its case before Ld CIT(A). Accordingly,
we set aside the order of Ld CIT(A) and restore all the matters to his file
with the direction to consider them after affording adequate opportunity of
being heard and take appropriate decision in accordance with the law.
The assessee is also directed to co-operate with the Ld CIT(A) without fail.






5.       In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed
for statistical purposes.


         The above order was pronounced in the open court on 16th
Jan,2015.

               16 th Jan 2015    

                      sd                                 sd

(.. / H.L. KARWA)                           (..  ,/ B.R. BASKARAN)
  / PRESIDENT                                 /Accountant Member
  Mumbai: 16th Jan, 2015.


. ../ SRL , Sr. PS

        /Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1.  / The Appellant
2.  / The Respondent.
3.     () / The CIT(A)- concerned
4.      / CIT concerned
5.      ,     ,                   /
     DR, ITAT, Mumbai concerned
                                            21/M/2011
                        3


6.     / Guard file.


                                    / BY ORDER,
           true copy
                               (Asstt. Registrar)
                           ,  /ITAT, Mumbai