VINOD SHARMA,SAHARANPUR vs. JAO, SAHARANPUR, SAHARANPUR

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that its case deserves to be remitted back to the ld. CIT(A) on account of peculiar facts of its case. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld. Assessing Officer had passed an ex-parte order in its case which was apparently necessitated on account of non-compliance by the assessee. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee was confined to judicial custody between the period of 20.11.2017 to 28.05.2018 in some personal case. The ld. Assessing Officer passed the order u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 dated 26.12.2017 completing the assessment and assessed the income of the assessee at Rs.1,30,77,310/- after making addition on account of cash deposits in assessee’s bank account as well as the other heads of addition. The ld. Counsel informed that the assessee had filed appeal before the learned First Appellate Authority on 01.02.2018. Meanwhile, the assessee proceeded to avail benefit of contemporaneous Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme Act of 2020 and the issue thereof was conveyed to the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) considering the above fact of adoption of VSVS scheme, dismissed the appeal of the assessee as withdrawn. Subsequently, the assessee got a communication from ld. PCIT, Dehradun, dated 03.03.2026 informing him its application under VSVS was non-maintainable on account of some differences in tax payments by the assessee. It is the case of the appellant assessee that justice is still eluding him because of firstly non-consideration of merits of the case by the ld. CIT(A) and rejection of its VSVS petition ground. It was accordingly, requested that the ld. CIT(A) may be directed to admit his appeal and give a decision on merits. In support of his contentions, the appellant assessee has filed a small paper book containing details of its arrest by the police and communication with the department on the issue of VSVS Scheme.

The ld. DR did not oppose the proposal of the assessee for remission while considering that it is indeed, it is an ex-parte order passed by the ld. CIT(A). 4. We have heard rival submissions in the light of material placed on records. Upon consideration of varied facts of this case enumerated hereinabove, there is no denying the fact that the justice has indeed eluded the appellant. The appellant has justifiable cause for non-compliance before the ld. CIT(A). Even though, the appellant had itself withdrawn the appeal filed before the Ld. First Appellate Authority to avail facility under VSVS Scheme, which could not succeed on account of technical difficulties of tax payments. Be that as it may be, we are of the considered view that ends of justice would be met if the matter is remitted back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for re-adjudication. The ld. CIT(A) may call for a remand report from the ld. Assessing Officer. Accordingly, we set-aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and direct him to re-adjudicate the matter afresh after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee and in accordance with law. It shall be bounden upon the assessee to comply with the statutory notices by the ld. CIT(A). 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 04th August, 2026.

CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi,