MAHESH MOHANTY,KENDRAPARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KENDRAPARA WARD, KENDRAPARA

It was submitted by the ld AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without considering the submission of the assessee attached with Form 35 before the ld.CIT(A). It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of ld. AO to decide the issue involved in the appeal afresh so that the assessee could be able to produce all the evidence to substantiate his claim.

& 237/CTK/2025 3. In reply, ld Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A).

We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the ld.CIT(A) clearly shows that the assessee could not substantiate his claim by providing relevant documents in appellate proceedings. Even before the AO during the course of assessment proceedings the assessee was unable to produce any documentary evidence to substantiate his claim. This being so, in the interest of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of ld.AO for adjudicating afresh on merits after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee shall cooperate in the readjudication proceeding before the ld. AO positively. Thus, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

With regard to it was brought to our notice that this appeal is a duplication of the appeal of ITA No.234/CTK/2025 and does not require any separate adjudication, therefore, the same may be treated as infructuous. Ld. Sr. DR also did not raise any objection in this regard. Thus, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the present appeal filed by the assessee is a duplication of ITA No.234/CTK/2025, which has already been adjudicated by us, therefore, the same is not required any separate adjudication and accordingly we dismiss the same as has become infructuous. Thus, ITA No.237/CTK/2025 is dismissed.