Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee failed to provide necessary explanations and documentary evidence to the Assessing Officer (AO) and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)). Consequently, the CIT(A) upheld the AO's action and dismissed the assessee's appeal.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Observing the assessee's non-compliance before the lower authorities, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication, directing the assessee to submit all details without adjournments.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee's failure to provide requisite information to the AO and CIT(A) warrants a remand for de novo adjudication.
Sections Cited
250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT BENCH, SURAT
Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-MS SUCHITRA RAGHUNATH KAMBLE
(Assessment Year: 2010-11) Ketan Chimanlal Dhruv, ITO, 401, Laxmi Vilas Apartments, Vs. Ward – 1(3)(1), Near Jain Derasar, Nagtalvadi, Surat Navsari - 396445 Jurisdictional AO: [PAN: ACBPD2774R] ITO, Ward – 1(3)(1), Surat (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Manoj Makhania, CA Respondent by: Shri Ashish Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 22.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 23.01.2026 O R D E R
PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:
This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, [hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 25.02.2020 under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [in short “the Act”] for the Assessment Year 2010-11.
Delay condoned.
3. On perusal of the records, it is observed that the assessee was afforded sufficient opportunities of hearing given by the Assessing Officer, but the assessee failed to furnish requisite explanations and reply before the AO. Consequently, the Ld. CIT(A), based on the material available on record, upheld Asst. Year: 2016-17 - 2– the action of the AO and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. We also find that the assessee remained non-compliant before the AO and failed to furnish requisite documentary evidence to substantiate his claim. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that one more opportunity may be given, all necessary details, clarifications, and explanations would be furnished before the revenue authorities. Hence, in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to the AO for de novo adjudication. The assessee shall submit all the relevant details and documents before the AO without seeking any unnecessary adjournments.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.