DHAREMENDRA SINGH,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, W-2(1)(4), , RUDRAPUR

The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)’/NFAC’ for short), Delhi dated 21/11/2023 for the Assessment Year 2017-18.

Brief facts of the case are that, an ex-parte assessment order came to be passed u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. The Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) which has been dismissed on 21/11/2023 vide order impugned. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee preferred the present Appeal.

There is a delay of 352 days in filing the present Appeal. The Assessee filed a petition for condonation of delay contending that the Assessee was serving Indian Army till 30/06/2018 and during his service, served in different locations, therefore, the notices isused by the Department and also order of the Ld. CIT(A) could be served on the Assessee, which resulted in filing the present Appeal belatedly, thus sought for condoning the delay. For the reasons stated in the application for condonation of delay, delay of 352 days in filing the present Appeal is hereby condoned.

The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the Assessee is an ex-service man who has been posted in different locations, therefore, the notice issued by the Department has not been served on the Assessee which resulted in passing the ex-parte order by both A.O. as well as Ld. CIT(A), which is in violation of principals of natural justice. The Ld. Counsel further submitted that, the Assessee is having very good case on merit, therefore, sought for remanding the matter to the file of the A.O. and stated that assessee may be issued notice to the address mentioned in the cause title.

Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that the Assessee has not appeared before the lower authorities, therefore, the authorities below have rightly passed the respective orders which requires no interference. Therefore, sought for dismissals of the Appeal.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. Both the order of the A.O. as well as order of the Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte, wherein the Assessee has not participated in any of the proceedings. It is the case of the Assessee that, the Assessee has been posted in the different location, therefore, the notice could not be served on him which made him not to participate in the proceedings before the Lower Authorities. Considering the fact that the assessment order has been passed ex-parte and the Ld. CIT(A) has also not decided all the grounds of Appeal on its merits, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to restore the issue to the file of the A.O. for de-novo assessment. The Assessee is at the liberty to produce any/all documents in support of his claim and A.O. shall verify the documents and frame the assessment order afresh. Needless to say, the A.O. shall provide opportunity of being heard to the Assessee before passing the assessment order in accordance with law.

In the result, the Appeal of the Appellant is partly allowed for statistical purpose.