NARESH PRASAD AGARWAL,RANCHI vs. ITO, WARD -2(1),, HAZARIBAGH

Assessee represented by None Department represented by Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr.DR Date of hearing 08/01/2025 Date of pronouncement 05/02/2025 O R D E R PER: PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC)/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] dated 22/10/2024 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 as per the grounds of appeal on record.

2. At the time of hearing, none has appeared on behalf of assessee, though, the notice of hearing have been duly served as per given registered address.

3. Submissions of the learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr.DR) for the revenue are recorded and the documents have been given careful consideration while the matter is taken as heard.

4. At the outset of hearing, it is observed that the ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal of the assessee without admitting certain additional evidences filed by the assessee. In fact, it is the case of assessee that these were not in the form Naresh Prasad Agrawal Vs ITO of additional evidences but were already on record before the department. That as per the order of learned. CIT(A), he has treated these evidences as additional evidences and has not considered at all while dismissing the appeal of the assessee. Still as per Rule 46A(3) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (in short, the Rules), the learned. CIT(A) has power to admit the additional evidences and call for a report from the jurisdictional Assessing Officer regarding those evidences submitted. That only upon receiving response from the Assessing Officer, the matter should be adjudicated in the best interest of justice. When such power has been given to the ld. CIT(A) that a ground report can be obtained through the Assessing Officer, therefore, as the First Appellate Authority in order to effectively adjudicate the matter, the necessary documents should have to be considered. Here is the case where the ld. CIT(A) at the threshold itself did not consider the documents which were filed before him stating that since the assessee had sufficient opportunity before the Assessing Officer and since the assessee had not availed such opportunities before the Assessing Officer, therefore, these additional evidences cannot be accepted and the appeal was dismissed. However, as a quasi judicial authority, it is essential to consider all the relevant documents on record and then form a reason to pass the order. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, I set aside the order of ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter back to his file with direction to admit additional evidences as per the terms of Rule 46A(3) of the rules and adjudicate the matter de novo as per law complying with the principles of natural justice. The assessee is also directed to file all the relevant documents before NFAC/ld. CIT(A) and represent his case on merits.