Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
Before: BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHANMANISH AGARWAL
Assessment Year : 2016-17 Jonaki Chand, Qr. No.A/E Jonaki Chand, Qr. No.A/E- Vs. Assessing Officer, National Assessing Officer, National 126, 126, VSS VSS Nagar, Nagar, PS: PS: Faceless Faceless Assessment Assessment Saheed Saheed Nagar, Nagar, Centre, Delhi Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar. PAN/GIR No. No.AGLPC 9992 N (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR Date of Hearing : 11/12/20 2024 Date of Pronouncement : 11/12/20 024 O R D E R Per Bench This is an This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of th appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 9.10.2024 CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 9.10.2024 in Appeal No. in Appeal No.NFAC/2015- 16/10124327 for the ass for the assessment year 2016-17, in the matter of assessment 17, in the matter of assessment u/s.147 r.w.s 144 of the Act. u/s.147 r.w.s 144 of the Act.
Shri P.K.Mishra P.K.Mishra, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. , Sr. DR appeared for the revenue.
P a g e 1 | 3
It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee exparte without affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee. It was the submission that the ld CIT(A) has issued eight notices and out of same, thrice the assessee sought adjournment due to the fact that the assessee’s husband was suffering from asthma and other allied diseases, for which, the assessee has submitted medical prescriptions to support his submission. It was the submission that even before both the lower authorities, as the adequate opportunities had not been granted, the assessee was unable to produce any evidence in support of her case. It was the prayer that the assessee may be granted another opportunity to produce all the evidences to substantiate her case before the Assessing Officer.
In reply, ld Sr DR vehemently opposed the prayer. It was the submission that the order of the ld CIT(A) is liable to be upheld.
5. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the orders of lower authorities. A perusal of the present case clearly shows that the assessee has been granted several opportunities to present her case but on account of the health issue of assessee’s husband, the assessee was unable to produce the evidences before the ld CIT(A). It is also observed that at the assessment stage also, the assessee has not responded to any notice to substantiate her case. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the issues in this P a g e 2 | 3 appeal are restored to the file of the AO for readjudication after allowing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 11/12/2024.
SD/- SD/- (Manish Agarwal) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 11/12/2024 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Jonaki Chand, Qr. No.A/E- 126, VSS Nagar, PS: Saheed Nagar, Bhubaneswar 2. The Respondent: Assessing Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi 3. The CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr.CIT, Bhubaneswar 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// By order
Sr.Pvt.Secretary ITAT, Cuttack
P a g e 3 | 3