ABDUL REHMAN BHAT,SRINAGAR vs. ITO WARD 1 SRINAGAR, SRINAGAR

Since there was common issue involved in both these appeals related to violation of natural justice and hence these two appeal were heard together after hearing the Ld. DR, although none attended for these assesses. Further, we had rejected the adjournment application filed by one of these assessees being found devoid of merits in the case of appeal number in ITA No. 216/Asr/2025.

We condone the delay of 192 days in the case of in as the Ld. DR has no objection to the request of the assessee for the condonation of the delay in filing the appeal in view of the genuine and bonafide reasons for the said delay in filing the appeal before the tribunal. Accordingly, we condone the delay of 192 days and admit appeal on merits. The facts are discussed from (Assessment Year 2017-18) as a lead case.

We find from the record that the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has confirmed the ex- parte assessment order passed u/s 144 of the act, by merely observing that the assessee remained non-compliant and non-cooperative and did not submit any reply till the end of the process assessment proceedings. Accordingly, he concluded that he was constrained to uphold the order of the AO in absence of any supporting evidence, document presented by the appellant. Thus, the Ld. CIT (A)/NFAC without going into merits of the case, confirmed the addition made by the AO in an ex parte assessment order passed u/s 144 of the act in violation of principles of Natural Justice. In our view, the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC ought to have appreciated the facts of the case and granted opportunity to the assessee in view of principles of natural justice before giving his blanket adverse casual observation.