PAWAN KUMAR CHOUDHARY,BANKURA vs. ITO, WARD 3(3), , BANKURA

The Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) is an ex parte order and is a non-speaking order without providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Hence, the ld. AR prayed before the Bench to set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for adjudication afresh. Ld. Sr. DR opposed this prayer of the assessee. 4. After hearing the rival submissions and going through the order of the Ld. CIT(A), we find that the Ld. CIT(A) issued seven notices for hearing of the appeal but there was no compliance on the part of the assessee. Since the assessee could not present himself in the appellate proceedings, keeping this in mind and also treating this attitude against the principles of natural justice, we are of the view that the assessee should be granted one more opportunity. This being so, the issue in this appeal is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudicating afresh after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) on the date of hearing diligently and without any fail. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 15th May, 2025 (Pradip Kumar Choubey) Accountant Member

Appellant–Shri Pawan Kumar Choudhary. 2. Respondent – ITO, Ward-3(3), Kolkata. 3. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Kolkata,By Order