What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal to the file of the AO, granting the assessee one more opportunity to be heard and present evidence.

The assessee failed to produce necessary documents before the AO, leading to an ex-parte assessment. The CIT(A) did not consider additional evidence produced by the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in not considering additional evidence and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case before the AO.

Mubashshir Ahmed, Guwahati vs ITO | s.144, 250 | ITAT Guwahati 2023

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, GUWAHATI BENCH, GUWAHATI

Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, HON’BLE & SHRI SONJOY SARMA, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri Somesh Bose, FCA

For Respondent: Shri N.T. Sherpa, JCIT

Hearing: 27.04.2023Pronounced: 28.04.2023

O R D E R

PER SONJOY SARMA, JM:

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 11.02.2020 of ld. CIT(A), Guwahati-1 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act [hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’].

At the outset, we observe that the assessment has been framed u/s 144 by the AO for the reason that assessee has failed to produce the bills, vouchers and necessary documents before the AO. Before ld. CIT(A) assessee produced additional evidences, however same were not considered and accepted by the ld CIT(A) and the appeal was decided sans these evidences. Under the facts and circumstances, the ends of justice would be met if the assessee is granted one more opportunity to be heard before the AO. Accordingly, we restore the appeal to the file of the AO and to decide the same after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

MUBASHSHIR AHMED,GUWAHATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4), GUWAHATI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments