AFZAL AHMAD,BAREILLY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(1), BAREILLY

O R D E R (A) This appeal vide has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2019-20 against impugned appellate order dated 09.10.2025 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025- 26/1081579734(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. The facts of the case, in brief, are that in this case, ex parte (B) assessment order dated 28.03.2024 was passed by the Assessing Officer (“AO”, for short) u/s 147 read with section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”, for short) whereby the assessee’s income was determined at Rs.14,14,727/-. The order passed by the AO was an ex-parte order qua the assessee. Vide impugned appellate order dated 09.10.2025, the assessee’s appeal was dismissed by the learned CIT(A). The order of learned CIT(A) was passed ex-parte qua the appellant assessee.

Assessment Year:2019-20 2 (C) At the time of hearing, there was no representation from the assessee’s side. In the absence of any representation from the assessee’s side, the learned D.R. for Revenue was heard. It is found that the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A) and the assessment order, both were passed without providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, impugned appellate order of Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and issues in dispute are restored back to the file of the AO with the direction to pass de novo order in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Learned D.R. for Revenue was in agreement with this, at the time of hearing. All grounds of appeal are treated as disposed of in accordance with the aforesaid directions. (D) In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes. (Order pronounced in the open court on 12/03/2026)

Sd/. (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) Accountant Member Dated: 12/03/2026 Vijay Pal Singh, (Sr. PS) Copy of the order forwarded to :

1. 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent.

3. Concerned CIT 4. D.R., I.T.A.T., 5. CIT(A)