KULJEET SINGH,KARNAL vs. ITO WARD-1, KARNAL

At the time of hearing, none appeared for the assessee. On going through the record we find that the appeal of the assessee is filed delayed by 144 days and an application for condonation of delay along with an affidavit has been filed deposing that the reason for filing the appeal late is attributed to the fact that the assessee’s son was living abroad and he was having access to the e-mail 2

Further, we find that the assessee has failed to appear before the NFAC. Although the ld. DR defended the order of the NFAC submitting that sufficient notices were issued, however, considering the fact that the impugned order does not disclose the mode of service and, more so, when in his submissions the assessee has sought opportunity for filing the additional evidence u/s 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, we consider it an appropriate case to give the assessee an opportunity to contest on merits. The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. The issues on merits are restored to the files of the NFAC to give a fresh opportunity of being heard and decide in accordance with the law.