BALWANT,BAHADURGARH vs. ITO, WARD 1, ROHTAK

The appellant assessee was called absent

The ld. DR while relying upon the order of the lower authorities, took us through the factual matrix of the case. We have noted the both the lower authorities being the ld. AO as well as the Ld. First Appellate Authority have passed an ex-parte order. We have noted that the rights of natural justice of the assessee have been violated in as much as the impugned order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s 144B, dated 23.03.2024 has been passed without giving adequate opportunity of being heard. The misconduct of the assessee in not complying to the statutory notices of the ld. First Appellate Authority are evident from the assailed appellate order dated 23.03.2024. The appellant in its grounds of appeal has also requested for being accorded another opportunity to defend its case and has requested for remission of the matter to the ld. Assessing Officer for readjudication de novo. We are conscious of the fact that no appellant benefits by non-prosecution of its case. Be that as it may be, we are of the view that the matter deserves to be remitted back to the ld. AO for re-adjudication de novo. Accordingly, we set- aside the order of the lower authorities and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. AO for assessment de novo in accordance with law and by way of passing a speaking order. The Ld. AO shall give opportunities of being heard to the assessee and it shall be bounden upon the assessee to comply with the notices issued by the Ld. Assessing Officer. Any non-compliance on the part of the assessee can be adversely viewed. The decision to remit it back to the Ld. AO is taken in view of the fact that an Assessing Officer is the fulcrum of assessment proceedings. He possess the first right and responsibilities to examine facts of a case before