Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) which dismissed the appeal without providing an adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee requested the matter be restored to the AO for fresh adjudication.
Held
The Tribunal acknowledged that the assessee had not substantiated their claim with documents. However, in the interest of justice, the Tribunal granted the assessee one more opportunity to present their case before the AO.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR
(नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-2019) Jyoti Ranjan Biswal, Vs ITO Angul Ward, Angul S/o: Gour Chandra Biswal, At”: Bantol, PO: Talcher Rly Stn. Dist : Angul-759102, Odisha PAN No. : AUHPB 6966 B (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 14/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 14/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order, dated 04.04.2025 passed by the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2018-2019.
It was submitted by the ld AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without providing any sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of ld. AO to decide the issue involved in this appeal afresh so that the assessee could be able to produce all the evidence to substantiate his claim.
3. In reply, ld Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A). It was the submission that the assessee has not produced any evidence either before the ld. Assessing Officer or before the ld. CIT(A). It was the submission that looking to the non- cooperative attitude of the assessee, a reasonable cost deserves to be levied.
We have considered the rival submissions. As it is noticed from the orders of the authorities below that the assessee could not substantiate its claim by providing relevant documents neither before the ld. CIT(A) in appellate proceedings nor before the ld. AO in assessment proceedings. However, the ld. AR has made a request before the Bench that if the assessee is given one more opportunity to represent its case before the ld. AO, the assessee could be able to provide all the details before the ld. Assessing Officer to substantiate its claim. This being so, in the interest of justice, we grant the assessee one more opportunity to substantiate its claim before the ld. AO by restoring the issues in this appeal to the file of ld. AO for adjudicating afresh after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, subject to a payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) shall be payable by the assessee to the Income Tax Bar Association, ITAT Campus, Sector-1, CDA, Cuttack- 753014, within sixty days from the date of this order and receipt of the same would be produced before the AO at the first hearing. Should the assessee not pay the abovementioned costs within the prescribed period of sixty days from the date of this order, the order of the ld. CIT(A) shall