MAU SAJID,BULANDSHAHR vs. ITO, BULANDSHAHR

I have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. It is noticed that the assessment order was passed u/s 144. Despite certain opportunities granted by the ld. CIT(A), the assessee remained unrepresented. Resultantly, the appeal was : “dismissed for want of prosecution.”

The ld. AR submitted the reasons for absence, with which I am satisfied. I, therefore, set aside the impugned order and remit the matter to the file of Assessing Officer for framing the assessment afresh as per law, after allowing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is made clear that if the assessee still evades the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer will be entitled to draw adverse inference against the assessee.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. The decision was pronounced in the open court on 09th June, 2017.