GAURAV SACHDEVA,HISAR vs. ITO WARD -1, HISAR

PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), dated 28/05/2025 pertaining to Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 21/03/2024 u/s 144 r.w. Section 144B by computing the income of the Assessee at Rs. 2,53,33,090/-, as against the returned income of Rs. 8,15,160/- by disallowing an amount of Rs. 2,45,17,925/- on account of unexplained expenditure. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 21/03/2024, Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 28/05/2025, dismissed the Appeal filed by the Assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee preferred the present Appeal.

2
5. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It can be seen from the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the order impugned has been passed ex-parte without hearing the Assessee. It is further observed that while deciding the Appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided all the grounds of Appeal of the Assessee on its merits. Considering the facts that the Assessee has not participated in the first Appellate proceedings, in the interest of justice, we remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the Appeal afresh on its merits in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee.