Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to non-submission of documentary evidence. The assessee's representative argued that the CIT(A) passed the order ex-parte and requested the matter be restored for fresh adjudication. The revenue argued that despite opportunities, the assessee provided only partial information.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had not made full disclosure despite opportunities. However, to meet the principles of natural justice, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside. The matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal should be restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication to provide an opportunity for the assessee to submit documentary evidence.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK
Before: S/SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY(KZ) & RAJESH KUMAR
Assessment Year : 2015-16 Dillip Kumar Sahoo Vs. ITO, Ward-2 (1),Bhubaneswar Plot No 75, Punam Gate, Kunjapatna Sahi, Old Town 751002 PAN/GIR No. BTCPS 3659 D (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by : Shri S.K..Agarwal, CA Revenue by : Shri Prateek Kr Mishra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 01/07/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 01/07/2025 O R D E R Per Bench The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order dated 17/03/2025 of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NAFC), New Delhi NFAC), Delhi in Appeal No.NFAC/2014-15/10055757 passed for Assessment Year 2015- 16.
At the time of hearing, ld AR of the assessee submitted that the ld CIT(A) passed the impugned order exparte. It is prayed that the matter be P a g e 1 | 3 restored to the file of the ld CIT(A) for fresh adjudication as the ld CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal on the ground that no documentary evidences have been submitted. He prayed that if the matter is restored to the file of the AO, the assessee will furnish all the documentary evidences in support of the claim.
On the other hand, ld Sr DR submitted that despite giving various opportunities the assessee had provided only partial information, which could not justify the claim of the assessee. Hence, by restoring again the appeal to the file of the AO, no fruitful purpose will be served.
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. A perusal of the impugned order clearly shows that despite giving various opportunities, the assessee has not made full disclosure in support of the claim, therefore, ld CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the AO. Before us, ld AR undertakes that the assessee will cooperate the proceedings, if the matter is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) in order to meet the principle of natural justice, and remit the matter back to the file of the Assessing officer with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, we also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings
P a g e 2 | 3 before the AO, failing which the AO shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits based on the materials available on the record. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.
Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 01/07/2025.