PUNJA PARBAT CHAUDHARY,MUMBAI vs. NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI

Admittedly, both the authorities below have passed the respective orders as ex-parte, specifically in the absence of relevant reply/documents, which the Assessee failed to file. The Assessee has claimed that due to inadvertent and bonafide mistake and lack of knowledge and mis-communication from his consultant, the Assessee remained unrepresented and therefore, in the interest of justice, may be by putting any condition, one opportunity may be given to the Assessee.

On the contrary, the Ld. D.R. refuted the claim of the Assessee.

Thus, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances specifically the quantum of addition and the issue involved which remained to be adjudicated in its right perspective and proper manner, this Court for just and proper decision of the case and substantial justice, is inclined to remand the instant case to the file of the Assessing Officer (AO), as an exception case. Thus, the case is remanded to the file of the AO for decision afresh; suffice to say by affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessee.

The Assessee is also directed to file the relevant documents/reply, as would be essentially required by the AO for proper and just decision of the case. In case of subsequent default, the Assessee shall not be entitled for any leniency. Punja Parbat Chaudhary

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.