MANISHA KUMARI,PATNA vs. WARD-5(2), PATNA, PATNA

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “PATNA BENCH, PATNA VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and Shri Rakesh Mishra, Accountant Member I.T.A. No.286/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Manisha Kumari…..……………..………. …………………....Appellant 5, Indrapuri, Keshri Nagar, Indrapuri, Patna, Pin-800024. Bihar.. [PAN: AFMPK0739D] vs. ITO, Ward-5(2), Patna ......…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances by: Shri Shikesh Jha, Adv., appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : October 14, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : October 23, 2025 आदेश / ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 18.11.2024 of the learned CIT(A), NFAC relating to the assessment year 2016–17. 2. Brief Facts of the Case are that the assessee is an individual who filed a return of income declaring total income of ₹2,29,470 for the assessment year 2016–17. Based on information that income to the tune of ₹7,50,000 had escaped assessment, the Assessing Officer recorded reasons for reopening the case and obtained the necessary approval from the competent authority. Consequently, notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee. No return of income was filed in response to the said notice. Thereafter, notices under Section 142(1) along with

I.T.A. No.286/Pat/2025 Manisha Kumari show-cause notices were issued, however, the assessee failed to comply with the same. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment ex parte under Sections 144 and 147 of the Act, treating the claimed agricultural income of ₹7,50,000 as “income from other sources.” 3. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A). The appeal, however, was dismissed ex parte, since neither the assessee nor her authorized representative appeared on five consecutive dates of hearing. Consequently, the learned CIT(A) upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. 4. Aggrieved, assessee has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal challenging the ex parte dismissal of the appeal by the CIT(A). At the time of hearing, it was also submitted that there was a delay of 132 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. An application for condonation of delay along with supporting reasons was filed by the assessee. We have considered the submissions and perused the reasons stated in the condonation petition. Being satisfied that the delay was caused due to reasonable and bona fide circumstances, we condone the delay of 132 days in filing the appeal and admit the same for adjudication on merits. 5. We observe that the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex parte, without adjudicating the grounds on merits. In our considered opinion, the learned CIT(A) is duty-bound to dispose of the appeal after considering the material on record and giving a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Dismissal of the appeal for non- prosecution without deciding the matter on merits is not justified. Accordingly, in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) shall re-examine the issues involved in

I.T.A. No.286/Pat/2025 Manisha Kumari accordance with law after affording due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to extend full cooperation and comply with all notices issued by the CIT(A) during the proceedings. Since the learned Departmental Representative has not raised any serious objection to this course of action, we find no impediment in remanding the matter. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above. Kolkata, the 23rd October, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- [Rakesh Mishra] [Sonjoy Sarma] लेखा सदस्य/Accountant Member न्याययक सदस्य/Judicial Member Dated: 23.10.2025. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3.CIT (A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR),

//True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches