Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeals for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15 were decided ex-parte by the CIT(A) because the assessee could not represent properly due to sufficient cause. The assessee sought an opportunity to represent their case before the CIT(A).
Held
The Tribunal found that there was a reasonable cause for the assessee's inability to represent their case effectively before the CIT(A). Therefore, the Tribunal decided to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to present their case by restoring the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing before the CIT(A) and if the matter should be restored for a fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “DB” BENCH, SURAT
Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN & SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT
Date of Hearing 09.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement 07.01.2026 ORDER Per: SHRI. SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.:
The present appeals have been filed by the assessee challenging the different impugned orders dt. 18.03.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) / CIT(A) for the assessment year 2013-14 & 2014-15.
Since all the issues involved in these two appeals are 2. common and identical, therefore, they have been clubbed, heard together and consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. We shall take A.Y 2013-14 as lead case and facts narrated therein.
ITA No. 499/SRT/2025, A.Y 2013-14
From the records, we noticed that assessee was ex- 2. parte before Ld. CIT(A). In this regard Ld. AR explained the circumstances before the bench that there was ‘sufficient cause’ which prevented the assessee to represent properly before Ld. CIT(A). On the other hand DR relied upon the orders passed by the revenue authorities.
Be that as it may, without going into the merits of the issues raised by the assessee and considering the fact that there was reasonable cause, because of which assessee could not put effective representation before Ld. CIT(A). Hence the Bench is of the view that one more opportunity be given to the assessee to represent his case before Ld. CIT(A). Therefore considering the overall circumstances of the present case, we deem it proper to restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the appeal afresh by providing one more opportunity to the assessee
Before parting, we make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute which shall be adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A) independently in accordance with law.
In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
As the facts and circumstances in this appeal is identical to for the AY 2013-14 ‘mutatis (except variance in figures) would apply mutandis’ for this appeal also. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.