VIJAY PAL SOLANKI,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 44(5), NEW DELHI

Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He had also not put in appearance on the earlier hearings as well. We thus proceed ex-parte against the assessee. 3. It is next noticed with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side that the learned Assessing Officer had framed his regular assessment herein on 31st March, 2016, inter alia, making section 37 disallowance followed by section 69 and 68 additions; involving varying sums, respectively, which stand upheld in the ex- parte lower appellate discussion. 4. The Revenue vehemently contends that both the learned lower authorities have rightly disallowed/added the impugned sums in assessee’s case on account of his failure to explain the source of his cash credits/deposits as well as investments etc., which need to be upheld herein as well. Our attention is further invited to the lower appellate ex-parte proceedings against the assessee in pages 4 to 5. 5. We note in this factual backdrop that there is no adjudication on merits, so far as the assessee’s various substantive grounds raised in his lower appeal are concerned, which indeed goes against the legislative mandate under section 250(6) of the Act, requiring 3 | P a g e the CIT(A) to first frame points of determination then followed by a detailed adjudication thereof. We are further mindful of the fact that the assessee had sought to raise an additional ground as well i.e. the “limited” vis-à-vis complete scrutiny assessment in his case, way-back on 11th December, 2023 and no corresponding details have since been filed till date. 6. Faced with this situation, we deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A) for his afresh appropriate adjudication as per law, preferably within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that it shall be the taxpayer’s risk and responsibility only to plead and prove all the relevant facts in consequently proceedings. Ordered accordingly. 7. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 28th March, 2025 (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER