M/S. INTERNATIONAL KNOWLEDGE FOUNDATION,NASIK vs. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE, AURANGABAD

These two appeals by the assessee arise out of the separate ex parte orders dated 27-12-2021 & 08-06-2023 passed by the CIT(A) in National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) in relation to the assessment years 2011-12 & 2012-13.

The appeal for the A.Y. 2011-12 is time barred by 490 days. An affidavit in this regard has been submitted explaining the reasons which led to delay in presenting the appeal before the Tribunal. I am satisfied with the reasons so stated. The delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for disposal on merits.

It is seen that the assessment order in this case was passed u/s.144 r.w.s.147 of the Act determining total income at Rs.22,08,940/-. The ld. CIT(A), on page 4 of the impugned order, noted that : “...various opportunities have been provided to the appellant by issuing various notices. ....However, despite the specific communication to the appellant, there is no reply. In such circumstances, this appeal is decided based on the material available on record”. He thus proceeded ahead and eventually dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex parte qua the assessee.

Similar position prevails for this assessment year as well. The AO completed the assessment u/s.144 r.w.s.147 of the Act determining total income at Rs.11,32,785/-. The ld. CIT(A) also passed the ex parte order in the absence of the assessee

After hearing both the sides and considering the entirety of facts and circumstances of the years under consideration, where both the assessment as well as the first appellate orders have been passed in the absence of the assessee, I am of the opinion that it would be just and fair if the impugned orders are set-aside and the matters are remitted to the file of the AO with a direction to pass the assessment orders afresh as per law after allowing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. I order accordingly. Needless to say, the assessee will be at liberty to lead any fresh evidence in support of its case in the fresh assessments.

In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.