SUDHARANI BASAK EDUCATIONAL TRUST,THANE vs. ITO (EXEMPTION)-2(2), MUMBAI

PER B.R. BASKARAN, A.M :

The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated
13-11-2024 passed by the Ld. Principal Commissioner of Income
Tax(Appeals)-54, Mumbai [Ld.CIT(A)] and it relates to the Assessment Year
(AY.) 2016-17. 2
2. At the outset, we notice that the Ld.CIT(A) was constrained to pass the order ex-parte, since the assessee did not submit the details in support of various contentions. The Ld.CIT(A) also noticed that the assessee has been seeking adjournment every time and hence he proceeded to dismiss the appeal of the assessee. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee was collecting various details for presenting its case effectively before the Ld.CIT(A) and hence, he was seeking adjournment. The Ld.AR submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has passed the impugned order, without adjudicating the grounds on merits.
3. We heard the Ld.DR and perused the record. Since the Ld.CIT(A) has passed the order ex-parte without adjudicating the grounds on merits, in the interest of natural justice, we are of the view that the assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to present its case properly before the Ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) and restore all the issues to his file for adjudicating them afresh, after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to fully co-operate with the Ld.CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the issue(s) in appeal.
4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 11-03-2025 (JUSTICE (RETD.) C.V. BHADANG)
PRESIDENT
Mumbai, Date: 11-03-2025

TNMM

3
Copy to :
1)
The Appellant
2)
The Respondent
3)
The CIT concerned
4)
The D.R, ITAT, Mumbai
5)
Guard file

By Order

Dy./Asst.