SONALI GHOSH,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 25(1),, KOLKATA

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “ld. CIT(A)”) dated 12.09.2025 passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”).

The Assessing Officer passed assessment order under section 147 read with section 144B of the Act whereby making addition of Rs.12,19,330/- in the hands of the assessee.

The appellate order was passed ex parte on account of alleged non-compliance and the Ld. CIT (A) sustained the order of the Assessing Officer.

Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), assessee is in appeal before this tribunal. At the time of the hearing the Ld. AR submitted Sonali Ghosh that the impugned assessment order is bad in law, having been passed without providing adequate opportunity of being heard and without examining the issues on merits. It was further submitted that the assessee could not effectively represent its case due to genuine difficulties and, therefore, one more opportunity may be granted to substantiate its claim before the lower authorities.

On the other hand the Ld. DR stated that although notices were served, but assessee did not appear therefore appeal of the assessee rightly dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) 6. We have carefully considered the submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the assessment as well as the appellate order have been passed ex parte, without proper adjudication of the issues involved. In our considered view, the matter deserves to be examined afresh in the interest of justice and fair play. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of the Learned CIT(A) with a direction to decide the issue afresh on merits, after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to comply with all notices and file necessary details as may be required.