GANESH BRIJMOHAN POKHRIYAL,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE -3, KALYAN

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 11.04.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for the assessment year 2016-17.

At the outset I notice that neither the assessee nor his representative appeared at all before the Ld.AO and required details were also not filed for claiming deduction u/s 57 of the Act. Even before ld. CIT(A), the assessee had not cooperated despite numerous and multiple opportunities granted by the Ld. CIT(A) and could not substantiate its claim of deduction.

Now, before me, it was argued that ‘sufficient opportunities’ were not granted by the department. However, this fact has been strongly refuted by Ld.DR.

Be that as it may, without going into or commenting upon the merits of the claim raised by the parties, I am of the view that adequate opportunity of hearing is a sine qua non before deciding the matter. Although in the present case sufficient opportunities were granted, but still taking a lenient view and keeping in mind the Principles of Natural Justice which ensures a fair hearing to present their case before a decision is made and also prioritizing fairness over strict adherence, to the procedural rules, to prevent an otherwise valid case from being dismissed.

Hence, bench is of the view that the interest of justice would be met in case the matter is restored back to the file of AO for denovo assessment subjected to cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be disposed, in Prime Minister Relief fund and the copy of receipt will be placed within 30 days from today on the file of the AO. Thus, I order accordingly.

Consequently matter is restored back to the file of AO for De-novo assessment after providing fair opportunities of hearing to the assessee.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed.