MAKEN LONGERMONGLA,DIMAPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, DIMAPUR, DIMAPUR

PDF

ITA 199/GTY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati25 June 2025AY 2016-17Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) in response to notices issued from his office. The Ld. AR pointed out that in ITA No. 199/Gty/2024, this fact is recorded on page 7 para 3 of the impugned order and in ITA No. 200/Gty/2024 also this fact is recorded at page 7 in para 3 of the impugned order for that year. It was also pointed out that even before the Ld. AO, the assessee had not been able to make any presentation of facts. In light of these facts, it was prayed that the matter may be remanded back to the file 3 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The assessee filed two appeals against orders of the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee's counsel contended that due to improper advice from a previous tax counsel, the assessee failed to comply with notices from the CIT(A) and AO, and thus requested a remand to the AO for a fresh opportunity to present facts. The Departmental Representative did not object to the remand.

Held

The Tribunal, finding it in the interest of substantive justice, set aside the impugned orders and remanded both cases to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment. The assessee was given another opportunity to present facts, with a directive to cooperate in the proceedings.

Key Issues

Whether a fresh assessment opportunity should be granted to an assessee who failed to comply with assessment proceedings due to improper advice from a tax counsel.

Sections Cited

Section 250 of Income Tax Act, 1961

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, GUWAHATI BENCH, GUWAHATI

Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Anil Kumar Agarwal, FCA Department represented by : Kausik Ray, JCIT Date of concluding the hearing : 10.06.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 25.06.2025

ORDER

PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This is a batch of two appeals pertaining to the same assessee. Since, the issues are inter-connected, hence, these two cases are being disposed of through a single order.

The present two appeals emanate from the orders under Section 250 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”) passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 31.07.2024.

& 200/GTY/2024 Maken Longermongla 2.1 In these two cases, the Ld. AR prayed that due to the fact that the assessee was improperly advised by the tax counsel retained by him, hence no compliance could be made before the Ld. CIT(A) in response to notices issued from his office. The Ld. AR pointed out that in 7 para 3 of the impugned order and in also this fact is recorded at page 7 in para 3 of the impugned order for that year. It was also pointed out that even before the Ld. AO, the assessee had not been able to make any presentation of facts. In light of these facts, it was prayed that the matter may be remanded back to the file of Ld. AO so that the assessee has one more opportunity of presenting the facts.

2.2 The Ld. DR while relying on the orders of authorities below, stated that he would have no objection if these two cases would go back to the Ld. AO for fresh assessment orders.

We have considered the rival submissions and also gone through the records. We feel that in the interest of substantive justice, the assessee deserves a chance to prove his case before the Ld. AO and therefore, we set aside the impugned order and remand both these cases to the file of Ld. AO for fresh assessment order. Needless to say, that the assessee would do well to cooperate in the assessment proceedings and be alert in responding to notices issued by the Ld. Assessing Officer. The Ld. AO would, of course, provide ample opportunity of being heard.