RAJESH RAGHAVBHAI PADHARIYA,RAJKOT vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2)(1), RAJKOT

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH: RAJKOT

Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI & SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA

Hearing: 28/07/2025Pronounced: 29/07/2025

िनधा�रती क� ओर से/Appellant by : Shri Vimal Desai, Ld.A.R. राज�व क� ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld.Sr. D.R. सुनवाई क� तार�ख/ Date of Hearing : 28/07/2025 घोषणा क� तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement : 29/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18, is directed against the order under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) (in short “Ld.CIT(A)”, dated 31.01.2024, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Act, dated 21.12.2019.

At the outset, Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that 2. during appellate proceedings, assessee sought adjournment to gather the required documentary evidences which were vital for preparation of assessee`s submission, and to contest the assessee`s issue in appeal, under consideration, however, Ld. CIT(A) did not give further time to the assessee, to file more details documents and evidences to prove his claim and on the contrary, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of assessee. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, contended that since the assessee wanted to submit required details and documents before ld CIT(A), which assessee could not submit for the reasons stated above, therefore, now the assessee, wants to submit some more details and documents to prove his claim before the assessing officer, therefore, this lis of the assessee, may be remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer, instead of Ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Therefore, Ld. Counsel for the assessee, prayed before the Bench that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before Assessing Officer.

The ld. Sr-DR of the Revenue has raised no objection if the matter is remitted back to the file of lower authorities.

We have heard both the parties and gone through materials available on record. We note that ld. CIT(A) has not decided the issue in respect of the ground raised by the assessee in Memo of Appeal as per the mandate of provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. The Ld. AR of the assessee requested to set aside the order of CIT(A) and requested the Bench that matter may be remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, as the assessee wants to file additional evidences and ld. Counsel for the assessee, undertook the responsibility that all the details would be filed before Assessing Officer, if another opportunity is granted to the appellant. The Ld. Sr-DR did not raise any objection, if the matter is restored to the file of Assessing Officer. In view of the above facts, we deem it proper to set aside the order of CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after granting adequate and fair opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is needless to say that assessee will be at liberty to adduce any evidences, as deemed relevant before the Assessing Officer at the time of de novo assessment proceedings, in consequence to this order and the Assessing Officer shall allow the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard and to make relevant submissions, and then pass a speaking order, which is fair and judicious. Accordingly, appeal of assessee, is allowed for statistical purposes.

RAJESH RAGHAVBHAI PADHARIYA,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2)(1), RAJKOT