Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
Before: BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN
Assessment Year : 2015-16 Anjana Devi Tulshyan Anjana Devi Tulshyan, C/O- Vs. The The Assessing Assessing Officer, Officer, Purushottam Purushottam Dayal Dayal National National Faceless Faceless Tulshyan, Tulshyan, At: At: Khetrajpur, Khetrajpur, Assessment Centre, Delhi Assessment Centre, Delhi PO: Balmukund, Dora Lane, PO: Balmukund, Dora Lane, dist: Sambalpur dist: Sambalpur PAN/GIR No. .ABBPT 0587 F (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv : Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR , ld Sr DR Date of Hearing : 30/09/20 2024 Date of Pronouncement : 30/09/2 2024 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld inst the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 20.06.2024 in Appeal in Appeal No.NFAC/2014- 15/10127230 for the assessment year 2015 15/10127230 for the assessment year 2015-16.
Shri P.K.Mishra, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Shri P.K.Mishra, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Shri P.K.Mishra, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue. S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue.
It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has passed the It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has passed the It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has passed the impugned order exparte wit impugned order exparte without affording reasonable opportunity of hout affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. hearing to the assessee. It was the submission that the Assessing Officer It was the submission that the Assessing Officer
P a g e 1 | 3 has reopened the assessment without having any fresh or tangible information in his possession by merely relying upon the information from DDIT(Inv) Unit. Ld AR has also challenged the reopening of assessment on the ground that the approval has been granted by ld JCIT, which is required to be granted by ld Pr.CIT after four years from the date of passing of the original assessment order. It was his request that the matter be restored to the file of the ld CIT(A) for re-adjudication both on legal and merits.
In reply, ld Sr DR supported the order of the AO and ld CIT(A).
I have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the assessee has been provided four opportunities to represent his case before the ld CIT(A), as is evident from the page 5 and 6 of the order. As the assessee failed to comply with the notices, the ld CIT(A) had no option but to dismiss the appeal of the assessee exparte. Before the Tribunal, ld AR prays for one more opportunity to represent his case before the ld CIT(A). In view of above, in the interest of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the ld CIT(A) for readjudication after allowing the assessee reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to comply with the notices issued by the ld CIT(A) and file documentary evidences in support of his case, as so desires.
P a g e 2 | 3
In the result, appeal of assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes
Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 30/09/2024. Sd/- (George Mathan) JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 30/09/2024 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Anjana Devi Tulshyan, C/O- Purushottam Dayal Tulshyan, At: Khetrajpur, PO: Balmukund, Dora Lane, dist: Sambalpur 2. The Respondent: The Assessing Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi 3. The CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr.CIT, Sambalpur 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. By order //True Copy// Sr.Pvt. Secretary ITAT, Cuttack
P a g e 3 | 3