RAJENDRA ARUN BARI ,JALGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1) JALGAON, JALGAON

It emerges during the course of hearing that the CIT(A) has noted the assessee’s continuous non-appearance in the lower appellate proceedings before rejecting the assessee’s contentions vide ex-parte order under challenge. Mr. Mehta could hardly dispute the clinching fact that the CIT(A)’s order has nowhere appreciated the assessee’s explanation/evidence on merits as 2 ITA.No.250/PUN./2024 contemplated u/sec.250(6) of the Act requiring it to give points for determination followed by a detailed adjudication thereof. Faced with the situation, I deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the NFAC for it’s afresh adjudication, preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing, subject to the rider that it shall be the taxpayer’s onus and responsibility only to file and prove all the relevant facts in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.