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

PDF

ITA 200/GTY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati25 June 2025AY 2017-18Bench: 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 for AY 2016-17 and 2017-18, contending that due to improper advice from his tax counsel, he could not comply with notices from the CIT(A) and the AO. The assessee's representative requested that the matters be remanded to the AO to provide another opportunity to present the facts. The DR had no objection to the remand for fresh assessment orders.

Held

The Tribunal, in the interest of substantive justice, agreed that the assessee deserved an opportunity to present his case. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside, and both cases were remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment proceedings. The Tribunal directed the assessee to cooperate and the AO to provide ample opportunity of being heard.

Key Issues

Whether the appeals should be remanded to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment, allowing the assessee to present facts after previous non-compliance attributed to counsel's improper advice.

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 this fact is recorded on page 7 para 3 of the impugned order and in 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.