AMAN NARPAT JAIN,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NON CORP. WARD 9(1), CHENNAI

आदेश / O R D E R PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M : This appeal is filed against the order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1058251503(1) dated 28.11.2023 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment year 2017-18. Through the aforesaid appeal the assesse has challenged order u/s 250 dated 28.11.2023 passed by NFAC, Delhi.

2.0 At the outset, the Ld.AR of the assessee pointed out that the Ld. AO has passed an order ex-parte without considering the replies of the assessee. It was further argued that the Ld. CIT(A) has also confirmed the order of the Ld. AO without any basis / supporting evidences. 3.0 According to the Ld.AR of the assessee, the assesse could not appropriately and adequately defend its case before the Ld. AO on account of personal problems. Accordingly, it was pleaded that a last opportunity be given to the assesse to present its case before the Ld. AO. Therefore, relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of TIN Box Co. v. CIT reported in [2001] 249 ITR 216 (SC), the Ld.AR pleaded one more opportunity be granted to the assessee before the Ld. AO. 4.0 Per contra, the Ld.DR doesn't want us to give one more innings to the assessee. Having heard both the sides and perused the records, we note that the Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal by observing that “…In this case assesse gave no explanation to the Ld. AO and I find the explanation given at the appeal stage is on the one hand without any basis or supporting evidence and on the other hand improbable from the point of circumstantial evidence and human probability…..”. Thus it is clear that no explanation was given to the