SANDEEP DUBEY,SHAJAPUR vs. ITO, SHAJAPUR, SHAJAPUR

Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 29.05.2023 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”], which in turn arises out of penalty-order dated 15.12.2021 passed by learned ITO, NFAC, Delhi [“AO”] u/s 271(1)(b) of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2012-13, the assessee has filed this appeal.

Ld. AR submits that the CIT(A) has passed order of first-appeal ex- parte since the assessee did not make representation on the dates of hearing fixed by him. He drew our attention to first Para of impugned order and submitted that the first-appeal was initially taken under physical system but subsequently migrated to faceless regime and being unaware of faceless systems, the assessee was not able to make representation. Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is willing and ready to make representation before CIT(A) if a chance is given. Ld. AR prayed that the matter may be remanded to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for a proper adjudication on merit after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Considering the prayer of Ld. AR and having regarding to the principle of natural justice and fair play, we deem it fit and appropriate to remand this matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for a proper adjudication after giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee, uninfluenced by his earlier decision. We order accordingly. The assessee is also directed to ensure participation in the hearings fixed by Ld. CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments.

Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.