SAROJ DEVI JHANWAR,BALASORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BALASORE, BALASORE

Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue.

It was submitted that the assessee is now residing in Odisha at the address provided in Form 36. It was the submission that the assessee was residing in Rajasthan at the address mentioned in the order of the ld. CIT(A). It was the submission that the assessee was residing in Odisha and the assessee could not appoint the necessary counsel to get his assessment proceedings conducted. It was the prayer that the issues may be restored to the file of ld. Assessing Officer for readjudication and the assessee shall undertake to make necessary arrangement to have his assessment properly done.

In reply, ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the ld. Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A). It was the submission that the assessee should have been more cautious in his tax matter.

We have considered the rival submissions. It is noticed that the assessment order as well as the order of the ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte orders. It is noticed that the address mentioned in Form 36 is in his order and is entirely different from that as mentioned in the order of the assessment order and the order of the ld. CIT(A). As the explanation given by the assessee has been found to be true, in the interest of justice, the issues in the appeal is restored to the file of Assessing Officer for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.