GOPI KRISHAN KEJRIWAL,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 43(1), KOLKATA

Per Bench : The captioned appeal by the assessee is against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)”] vide order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1070999910(1) dated 08.12.2024, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for AY 2021-22. 2. Shri A.K. Tirbriwal, FCA is represented on behalf of the assessee and Prakash Nath Barnwal, CIT-DR appeared on behalf of the revenue. 3. During the course of hearing, it was submitted by the ld. AR that there was a failure on the part of the assessee to produce all the evidence before the Assessing Officer. It was the submission that the assessee could not represent his case before ld. CIT(A). It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide the 2 Gopi Krishan Kejriwal, AY 2021-22

issue involved in all the appeals afresh so that the assessee could be able to produce all the evidence to substantiate his claim.
4. In reply, Ld. Sr DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and Ld. CIT(A).
5. We have considered the rival submissions. It is noticed that there is an admitted failure on the part of the assessee to represent its case before either of the authorities below. This being so, in the interest of justice, we grant the assessee one more opportunity to substantiate its claim before the Ld. CIT(A) by restoring the issues in the appeal to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication afresh. Needless to say, the assessee shall be granted adequate opportunity of being heard.
6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. (Sanjay Awasthi)
)

Judicial Member

Dated: 20th May, 2025

AK, Sr. P.S.

Copy to:

////

By Order