RANJITKUMAR JAIN,RANEBENNUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, HAVERI

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee being a proprietor is in the business of trading in Kappas and Cotton running under the name and style of M/s. Ashoka Cotton Traders. The Assessment Order under section 143(3) of the Act was passed on 27.03.2015 on a total assessed income of Rs.2,21,93,680/- by making total addition amounting to Rs.2,16,68,530/- under the following heads- i) Sundry Creditors difference

Aggrieved by the Assessment completed under section 143(3) of the Act dated 27.03.2015, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A), Davangere. The CIT(A) vide his Order dated 27.05.2016 had partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Thereafter, aggrieved by the Order of the ld. Page 4 of 6

Thereafter, the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC vide Order dated 24.06.2024 has held that as the Hon’ble ITAT, Bangalore Bench had disposed the Revenue’s appeal relevant to the above CIT(A), Davangere, on 02.08.2017. Hence, the present appeal of the assessee is treated as infructuous and as such is dismissed for statistical purposes. The assessee again being aggrieved by the Order of the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dated 24.06.2024, has filed the present appeal before this Tribunal. Page 5 of 6

Before us, the learned AR of the assessee vehemently submitted that ld. CIT(A)/NFAC without understanding the factual aspect has been pleased to dismissed the appeal by treating the same as infructuous and accordingly prayed to restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC again and to decide the case as per the direction of this ITAT, Bangalore Bench vide Order dated 02.08.2017. 6. Learned DR on the other hand also are in concord with the view of the learned AR of the assessee and submitted that the issue may be remanded back to the file of CIT(A) as per the direction of this Hon’ble Bench vide Order dated 02.08.2017. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. On going through the Order of the Tribunal dated 02.08.2017, we find that this Tribunal categorically set aside the impugned Order of the ld. CIT(A) and restored the same to the file to him for fresh examination and denovo adjudication of all the grounds raised in the appeal after affording the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. Being so, we are of the opinion that ld. CIT(A) without understanding the factual aspects and even without going through to the Order of the Tribunal had treated the appeal of the assessee as infructuous and accordingly dismissed the same. This is nothing but a clear non-application of mind on the part of the CIT(A)/NFAC. With no fault the assessee, he is suffering just for the inconsiderate approach of the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Therefore, we have no hesitation to again restore the matter back to the file of CIT(A) / NFAC and direct that the direction as given in paragraph 3.4.3 of the Oder dated 02.09.2017 may be followed after giving both the parties a reasonable opportunity of being heard. It is ordered accordingly. Page 6 of 6

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed.

Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr.CIT 4.CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Bangalore.