ABDUL WASE,NANDED vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NANDED

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1500/PUN/2026 िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2024-25 Abdul Wase, Vs. ITO, Ward- (2), Nanded. 9-1-93, Sidhnath Puri Nai Masjid, Karbala Road, Itwara, Nanded- 431604. PAN : AIHPW8508Q Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Shaikh Basiruddin (Virtual) Revenue by : Smt. R. M. Brindha Date of hearing : 30.07.2026 Date of pronouncement : 31.07.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 16.02.2026 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2024-25. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and furnished his return of income on 31.07.2024 declaring income

2 ITA No.1500/PUN/2026 of Rs.9,44,010/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) and show cause notice respectively were issued to the assessee. The Assessing Officer vide order dated 17.11.2025 completed the assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the IT Act by determining the income of the assessee at Rs.29,70,050/- as against the income of Rs.9,44,010/- returned by the assessee. 3. Being aggrieved with the above assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Since the assessee remained absent, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee for want of prosecution. 4. It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 5. We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record. In this regard, we find it is the sole request of the counsel of the assessee that the matter may kindly be restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, so that the assessee

3 ITA No.1500/PUN/2026 can substantiate the grounds of appeal, since earlier Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution, for which the appellant was prevented by sufficient and reasonable cause for not appearing before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC on the dates of hearing. Accordingly, it was prayed by Ld. Counsel of the assessee to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. 6. Considering the totality of the facts of the case, we find some force in the arguments of the counsel of the assessee and accordingly, in the interest of justice and without going into merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC with a direction to decide the appeal afresh and as per fact and law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in this regard and to produce relevant documents, submissions and evidences, if any, in support of grounds of appeal without taking any adjournment under any pretext, otherwise Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC shall be at liberty to pass

4 ITA No.1500/PUN/2026 appropriate orders as per law. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 31st day of July, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; �दनांक / Dated : 31st July, 2026. Sujeet/DOC Sujeet Kumar Digitally signed by Sujeet Kumar Sharma Sharma Date: 2026.07.31 11:54:33 आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : +05'30' अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” ब�च, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 5. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.