KIRAN KISHORMAL JAIN,MUMBAI vs. ITO 20(2)(3), MUMBAI

This appeal is filed by the assessee for A.Y. 2014-15 against the appellate order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, New Delhi [ the Ld CIT (A) ] dated 27th May, 2022, where the appeal of the assessee filed against the assessment order dated 20th December, 2016 passed by the Income Tax Officer, 20(2)(3), Mumbai, (the learned Assessing Officer) under Section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) was dismissed on merits ex parte.

The assessee preferred the appeal before the National Faceless Appeal Centre. Five notices were issued to the assessee; however, no response was received except seeking an adjournment on one occasion. The learned CIT (A) in absence of any further compliance by the assessee passed an ex-parte order dismissing the appeal of the assessee and confirming the additions/ disallowances made by the learned Assessing Officer. The assessee is aggrieved with that.

The learned Departmental Representative vehemently submitted that assessee did not comply any of the notices before the learned Assessing Officer as well as before the learned CIT (A) and therefore, the orders of the lower authorities deserves to be confirmed.

In rejoinder learned Authorized Representative submitted that this has happened only in case of A.Y. 2014-15. In all other assessment proceedings, the assessee was duly represented and due to inadvertence the non compliance has happened for the impugned assessment year.

We have carefully considered the rival contentions and find that the orders of the learned Assessing Officer as well as the learned CIT (A) were passed ex-parte. It is also is also a fact that assessee did not comply with the notices before the learned Assessing Officer as well as before the

All other grounds of appeal remain unadjudicated.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as directed above.