PRIYANKA SINGHA,HOWRAH vs. I.T.O., WARD-47(2), KOLKATA

Brief facts of the case are that, an Assessment Order came to be passed u/s 147r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 21.02.2025 by making certain additions. Aggrieved by the Assessment Order dated 21.02.2025, Assessee filed an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide Order dated 30.04.2026, dismissed the Appeal of the

The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the Assessee could not made proper compliance before the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A) in the first Appeal has not decided all the grounds of the Appeal of the Assessee and the ex-parte order impugned came to be passed in violation of principals of natural justice. Thus, sought for allowing the Appeal.

The Ld. Department's Representative submitted that the Assessee is a chronic defaulter who has not made proper compliance before the Lower Authorities, therefore, both the Assessing Officer as well as the Ld. CIT(A) have passed the respective orders in accordance with law, which requires no interference, thus by relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities sought for dismissal of the Appeal.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. The impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is ex-parte, wherein the Assessee has not participated in the proceedings and the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided all the grounds of Appeal on its merits. Even before the Assessing Officer, Assessee has not made full compliance. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for de-novo assessment. Needless to say, the Assessing Officer shall provide Page | 2

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