ANSHUL GUPTA & SONS HUF,DELHI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-46(4), DELHI, DELHI

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 30/09/2024 for the Assessment Year 2013-14.

The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the order impugned has been passed by the Ld. CIT(A) in violation of principals of natural justice wherein the Ld. CIT(A) has not provided opportunity of being heard to the Assessee, therefore, sought for remanding the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A).

The Ld. Departmental Representative by relying on the order of the Ld. CIT(A) submitted that, the Assessee has not appeared before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the Appeal, therefore, by relying on the order of the Ld. CIT(A) sought for dismissal of the Appeal.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. As could be seen from the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the order impugned has been passed ex-parte. Further, we observe that the Ld. CIT(A) has also not decided all the issues involved in the Appeal on its merit by dealing with the issues in detail. Therefore, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the Assessee to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) and co- operate with the appellate proceedings. The Ld. CIT(A) is also directed to pass order afresh in accordance with law, by providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee.

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.