Mangat Ram Sharma HUF vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-47(1)

PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:

This appeal by the assessee is directed against ex-parte order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short 'the CIT(A)'] dated 28.08.2025, for Assessment Year 2017-18.

Shri Amit Rustogi, appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that after filing appeal before the CIT(A), the Authorized Representative who was engage to represent the assessee did not pursue the appeal. The assessee was under bonafide impression that the appeal is being properly pursued by the AR. The Id. AR thus prayed for one more opportunity to the assessee to make submissions before the CIT(A). He contended that the assessee has prima facie good case on merits and if opportunity is granted the assessee would be able to substantiate that the addition made by the Assessing Officer (AO) are unsustainable.

Per contra, Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu representing the department strongly supporting the impugned order stated that despite multiple opportunities given by the AO, the assessee failed to respond to the notice(s). He thus, prayed for upholding the impugned order and dismissing appeal of the assessee.

Both sides heard. A perusal of the impugned order shows that it has been passed in ex parte proceedings. Four opportunities were granted to the assessee by the First Appellate Authority, however, none appeared on the dates fixed to make submissions on behalf of the assessee. It has been contended that the Authorized Representative who was authorized to make submissions before the CIT(A) failed to make submissions on behalf of the assessee and that the assessee was under the bonafide impression that he was being properly represented before the First Appellate Authority. Considering entire facts of the case, we deem it appropriate to restore appeal to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, after affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law.

The assessee shall respond to the notice(s) served by the CIT(A), without fail.

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.