MOHAMMED NASRUDEEN,PUDHUKOTTAI vs. ITO, WARD 3, CUDDALORE

आदेश / O R D E R PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the

Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, (hereinafter in

short "the Ld.CIT(A)”), Delhi, dated 10.01.2024, for the Assessment Year

(hereinafter in short "AY”) 2012-13.

Ld.CIT(A) who has passed an ex parte order without going into the merits

of the case. Since we note that the Ld.CIT(A) has passed the order ex

parte without going into the merits of the grounds of appeal raised by the

ITA No.646/Chny/2024 (AY 2012-13 ) Mohammed Nasrudeen :: 2 ::

assessee, it is in violation of sub-section (6) of section 250 of the Income

Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter in short "the Act. According to the assessee,

he has not received notice of hearing due to some glitches in the

internet/digital/computer. Therefore, he prays for one more opportunity.

innings to the assessee.

that impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) is an ex parte order qua assessee.

We note that the Ld.CIT(A) has not decided the grounds of appeal on

merits as required u/s.250(6) of the Act. In such circumstances, for the

ends of justice and fair play, we set aside the impugned order of the

Ld.CIT(A) and restore the appeal back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) with a

direction to decide the appeal on merits after hearing the assessee. The

assessee is also directed to be diligent and file relevant

documents/written submissions before the Ld.CIT(A) and the Ld.CIT(A) is

directed to decide the issue as per sub-section (6) of sec.250 of the Act.

ITA No.646/Chny/2024 (AY 2012-13 ) Mohammed Nasrudeen :: 3 :: चे�ई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 05th July, 2024. TLN, Sr.PS आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore. 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF