MR. TAPAN GHOSH,DIAMOND HARBOUR vs. ITO, WARD 33(4),, KOLKATA

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the NFAC dated 20.10.2023 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’).

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of contract work for several years and had filed the return of income declaring a total income of ₹10,15,818. The return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny, and assessment was completed determining the total income at ₹32,94,590 as against the returned income of ₹10,15,818. While doing so, the Mrs. Tapan Ghosh Assessing Officer made certain additions on account of various discrepancies. The assessment was completed ex parte under Section 144 of the Act due to non-appearance of the assessee.

The assessee thereafter filed an appeal before the learned CIT(A). However, the appeal was dismissed ex parte due to none compliance.

Aggrieved by the above order assessee is in appeal before this tribunal stating that the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT (A) is an ex parte order liable to be set aside. It is stated that there was a delay in filing the appeal. In this connection, the assessee filed an application explaining the reasons for the delay. After considering the same, we are satisfied with the explanation and accordingly condone the delay.

We, after considering the rival submissions and material on record, find that the both the order passed by CIT(A) and the assessment order had been completed ex parte, and in the interest of justice, equity, and fair play, it would be appropriate to afford the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Accordingly, the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer to examine the issues afresh and to pass an order in accordance with law after granting due opportunity to the assessee.

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