TOTA RAM SRIVASTAVA,BAREILLY vs. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI

PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA:A.M.

(A)
This appeal vide I.T.A. No.709/Lkw/2024 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2015-16 against impugned appellate order dated
30/07/2024
(DIN
&
Order
No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-
25/1067126862(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)”] for short].

(B)
This appeal has been filed by the assessee, beyond time limit prescribed under section 253(3) of IT Act. As per noting of registry, this appeal is time barred by 65 days. The assessee has submitted application
Appellant by None
Revenue by Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma,
Addl. CIT (D.R.)

I.T.A. No.709/Lkw/2024
Assessment Year:2015-16
2

for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal on medical ground, supported by medical certificate; pleading that the delay was unintentional and beyond the control of the assessee and has requested to admit the appeal for hearing. The learned Sr. Departmental Representative for Revenue did not express any objection to assessee’s application for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal. In view of the foregoing, and in specific facts and circumstances of the present appeal before us, the delay in filing of this appeal is condoned; and the appeal is admitted for hearing.

(C)
The assessment order in this case was passed on 16/03/2023 u/s 144/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“IT Act” for short) ex-parte qua the assessee by making addition of Rs.1,22,24,000/-. The assessee filed appeal against the assessment order in the office of learned CIT(A). Vide DIN &
Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1067126862(1) dated 30/07/2024, the assessee’s appeal was dismissed by the learned CIT(A) ex-parte qua the assessee. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 30/07/2024 passed by the learned CIT(A).

(D)
At the time of hearing, there was no representative from the assessee’s side. In the absence of any representation from assessee’s side, we have heard learned Sr. Departmental Representative. He relied on the orders dated 16/03/2023 and dated 30/07/2024 passed by the Assessing
Officer and the learned CIT(A) respectively. On perusal of records, it is seen that the assessment order as well as the impugned appellate order of the learned CIT(A), both were passed ex-parte qua the appellant assessee
Further, reasonable opportunity of being heard was not provided to the I.T.A. No.709/Lkw/2024
Assessment Year:2015-16
3

assessee. Learned D.R. for Revenue was in agreement that the issue in dispute regarding aforesaid addition of Rs.1,22,24,000/- may be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass de novo assessment order in accordance with law on this specific issue after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In view of the foregoing, the order of learned CIT(A) is set aside and restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass de novo assessment order in accordance with law on this specific issue after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

(E)
In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

(Order was pronounced in the open court on 11/02/2025) . .
(SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA)
Judicial Member Accountant Member

Dated:11/02/2025
*Singh

Copy of the order forwarded to :