SUNIL BABUBHAI MEHTA,KANDIVALI WEST, MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, MUMBAI

Order under Section 143(3) of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1. 1. This Appeal by Assessee is directed against ex-parte order of learned CIT(A)/NFAC, dated 27/12/2025 for assessment year 2015-16.

2. Rival submissions of both the parties have been heard and record perused. The learned authorised representative (Ld. AR) of the assessee submit that Ld. CIT(A) passed ex-parte order without giving fair and reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The assesse in response to various notices issued by Ld. CIT(A) under section 250 of the Act, sought adjournment for preparation of written submission. The Ld. CIT(A) despite acknowledging such request for adjournment dismissed the appeal in ex parte order by holding that assessee has not filed any submission and evidences in the course of appellate proceeding. The Ld.AR of the assessee submit that assessee is a Chartered Accountant by professions and interested in perusing his appeal on merit. As there is no adjudication of various grounds of appeal

AY 2015-16 Sunil Babubhai Mehta by Ld. CIT(A), therefore, the matter may be restored by to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication of various grounds of appeal on merit. He under taken on behalf of the assessee to be more vigilant in future in making timely compliance of the notices of Ld.CIT(A).

3. On the other hand, the Ld. CIT DR for the revenue submit that assessee was given reasonable opportunity by Ld.CIT(A), as recorded in para 6.2. of impugned order. The assessee chose to not file any written submission rather short adjournment. The assessee has not shown any reasonable cause for non-filing written submission. The assessee deserves no further opportunity and the appeal may be dismissed.

4. We have considered the rival submission both the parties and have gone through the orders of lower authorities carefully. Though, the assessee has raised multiple ground of appeal challenging the validity of reopening as well as addition on merit. However, at the time of making submission, the Ld.AR of the assessee vehemently argued that despite seeking adjournment his appeal was dismissed by Ld. CIT(A) in ex parte order without giving fair and reasonable opportunity. We find that in para 6.1. of his order the CIT(A), has categorically recorded that four show cause notice under section 250 of the Act, was issued to the assessee. We find that the assessee on all four occasions sought adjournment thus, the circumstance suggest that the assessee is interested in perusing his case on merit. Therefore, considering the fact that case appeal of the assessee was dismissed in ex-parte proceedings without adjudicating various grounds of appeal on merit thus, in AY 2015-16 Sunil Babubhai Mehta the interest of justice the matter is restored by to the field of Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate all the grounds of appeal on merits. Needless to direct that before passing the order, Ld. CIT(A) shall allow reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee also directed to be more vigilant in future in attending the matter and to file submission along with evidence in support thereof. The assessee is further directed not to seek adjournment without valid reasons.

5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.