IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                DELHI BENCH `H', NEW DELHI
      Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM And Sh. George George K, JM
             ITA No. 3334/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09
Vishal Girdhar                   Vs ITO
5256/57, Kolhapur Road,             Ward- 20(1)
Near Chandrawal Road
Delhi                                New Delhi
(APPELLANT)                          (RESPONDENT)
PAN No. ABSPV6557A
           Assessee by : Sh. V.Singh, CA
           Revenue by : Sh. P. Dam Kanunjha, Sr. DR
Date of Hearing : 02.06.2015    Date of Pronouncement : 04.06.2015

                               ORDER
Per N. K. Saini, AM:

     This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated
28.01.2013 of ld. CIT(A)-XXII, New Delhi.
     2.    Following grounds have been raised in this appeal :-
         "01. That on the facts and in the circumstances
    of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax
    (Appeals)-XXII has erred in law and on facts in
    disposing off the appeal exparte without giving any
    opportunity to the Appellant which is against the
    principles of natural justice.
         02. That, without prejudice to the Ground No.
    1 regarding not affording a reasonable opportunity
    to the appellant, the learned Commissioner of Income
    Tax (Appeals)-XXII has erred in law in sustaining an
    addition u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act of Rs.
                                2             ITA No. 3334/Del/2013


     13,39,715/- towards cash deposited by the Appellant
     in his Bank account ignoring the evidence on record
     of the Assessing Officer.
          03.    That the appellant leaves to crave, add,
     alter and / or delete any Grounds of appeal at later
     stage if necessary."
3.    During the course of hearing, the Ld. Counsel for the
assessee at the very outset stated that the Ld. CIT(A) has not
decided the appeal on merit and dismissed the same exparte in
limine.






4.    In his rival submissions, the Ld. DR supported the order
of the authorities below and further submitted that the assessee
did not cooperate and never appeared before the ld. CIT(A) so
there was no option except to dismiss the appeal for non-
prosecution.
5.    We have considered the submissions both the parties and
carefully gone through the material available on the record, in
the present case it is noticed that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the
appeal of the assessee, exparte, in limine and did not
adjudicate the issues raised by the assessee on merit. It is well
settled that nobody should be condemned unheard as per the
maxim "Audi      Alteram Pertam".     We    therefore, deem it
appropriate to remand this case back to the file of Ld. CIT(A)
to be decided afresh in accordance with law after providing
due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to assessee. We
                                  3            ITA No. 3334/Del/2013







also direct the assessee to cooperate and not to seek
unwarranted or undue adjournments.
6.          In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for
statistical purposes.
 (Order Pronounced in the Court on 04/06/2015)



       Sd/-                                   Sd/-
  (George George K)                       (N. K. Saini)
JUDICIAL MEMBER                        ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated:        04 /06/2015
*Binita*
Copy forwarded to:
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(Appeals)
5.DR: ITAT
                                            ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
                                              4                   ITA No. 3334/Del/2013




                                                       Date    Initial
1.    Draft dictated on                            2/06/2015
2.    Draft placed before author
3.    Draft proposed & placed before the
      second member
4.    Draft discussed/approved by Second
      Member.
5.    Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS
6.    Kept for pronouncement on
7.    File sent to the Bench Clerk
8.    Date on which file goes to the AR
9.    Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk.
10.   Date of dispatch of Order.