ADISESHA RAJU MANTENA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO,WARD-1, BERHAMPUR

None represented on behalf None represented on behalf the assessee and Shri the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR appeared for the revenue. DR appeared for the revenue.

It was submitted by ld Sr DR that the assessee has not produced any evidence before the Assessing Officer or ld CIT(A) nor has any agreement or Power of Attorney for sale of property. It was the submission that the assessee has not responded to the notices issued by the Assessing Officer and ld CIT(A). It was the submission that the assessment orders and the orders of ld CIT(A) for both the assessment years are liable to be upheld.

We have considered the submission of ld Sr DR. A perusal of the facts in the present case clearly shows that the assessee has not produced the requisite evidences before the AO and ld CIT(A). It is also noticed that without the evidence is being filed before the lower authorities, it would not be possible for the Tribunal to adjudicate the issue or examine any of the materials. This being so, in the interest of natural justice, the issues in these appeals are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 18/07/2024. Sd/- sd/- (Manish Agarwal) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 18/07/2024 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS)