ISHWAR CHAND,BAS KRIPAL NAGAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1 , ALWAR

P a g e | 1 ITA No. 1716/JPR/2025 Ishwar Chand IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, “A” BENCH, JAIPUR BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1716/JPR/2025 (Assessment Year:2016-17) Ishwar Chand Vs. ACIT, House No. 99, The Circle-01, Kishangarh Bas Vill Bas Alwar Kripal Nagar, Alwar 301404 �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AMRPC8801C Appellant .. Respondent

Appellant by : Sh. P. C. Parwal, CA Respondent by : Sh. Rajesh Ojha, CIT

Date of Hearing 26.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement 08.06.2026 O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre/Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals (hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)”) dated

P a g e | 2 ITA No. 1716/JPR/2025 Ishwar Chand 25.11.2025 u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act,1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 2. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has not given proper and adequate opportunity to the assessee to present his case; that the assessee had sought a short adjournment from the ld. CIT(A), which was not granted by the ld. CIT(A). That even the ld. CIT(A) has not discussed the case of the assessee on merits, but, dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution stating that the assessee did not furnish the requisite submissions despite the opportunities given. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, therefore, has submitted that the principles of natural justice have been violated in this case as the assessee had sought only a short adjournment to furnish the submissions, which was not granted by the ld. CIT(A). 3. The Ld. DR, on the other hand, has pointed out that a number of opportunities were granted by the ld. CIT(A) to the assessee, but every time, the assessee sought short adjournment and hence, the Ld. CIT(A) was left with no other alternative than to dismiss the appeal of the assessee. 4. We have heard the rival contention and gone through the record. It is apparent on the record that the ld. CIT(A) had given many opportunities to the assessee to make his submissions but every time, the assessee sought adjournment. However, it is also a fact on the record that the case of the assessee has not been decided on merits by

P a g e | 3 ITA No. 1716/JPR/2025 Ishwar Chand the Ld. CIT(A), whereas, as per the statutory provisions, he was supposed to decide the appeal of the assessee on merits. Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, in our view, the interests of justice will be well served, if, the assessee be given an opportunity present his case before the ld. CIT(A), however, subject to payment of reasonable costs of Rs. 5,000/- to be deposited in the Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund within 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The assessee will furnish the proof of such deposit before ld. CIT(A). Subject to compliance of the above stated condition, the impugned order of ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the appeal of the assessee on merits in accordance with law after giving proper and adequate opportunity to the assessee to present his case. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Order is pronounced under provision of Rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 on 08.06.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (Ratnesh Nandan Sahay) (Sanjay Garg) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated 08.06.2026 Mittali, Sr. PS True Copy Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent

P a g e | 4 ITA No. 1716/JPR/2025 Ishwar Chand 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT By Order, Asst. Registrar ITAT, Jaipur