SANJAYKUMAR DALPATBHAI SHAH,BANASKANTHA vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC, PRESENT JURIS. THE ITO, WARD-4, PALANPUR

The captioned appeals have been preferred by the assessee against the separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] of even date 02/01/2025 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for the Assessment Years (AYs) 2016-17 and 2017-2018.

At the outset, the Ld.Counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the impugned orders of the ld.CIT(A) to submit that the same are ex-parte & 447/Ahd/2025 Sanjaykumar Dalpatbhai Shah vs.Assessment Unit, NFAC, Present Juris. The ITO, Ward-4 Asst.Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 orders of the Ld.CIT(A). The Ld.Counsel inviting our attention to paragraph No.3 of the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) for AY 2016-17, has demonstrated that the assessee had prayed for an adjudication of the case as the assessee had to collect certain documents. In the impugned order, the Ld.CIT(A) observing that the assessee had already been granted four opportunities of hearing, thereafter proceeded to decide the appeal of the assessee ex-parte of the assessee. The Ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that the non-prosecution of the appeal before the ld.CIT(A) was not intentional, rather, the assessee had to collect certain documents which was very necessary for proper adjudication of the case of the assessee. That the assessee had duly filed the application which was rejected. The Ld.Counsel has, therefore, submitted that the assessee has a fair case on merits and that, he may be granted one more opportunity to present his case before the Ld.CIT(A). We find that similar observations have been made by the Ld.CIT(A) for AY 2017-18 in paragraph No.3 of the impugned order.