AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against an ex-parte order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short 'the CIT(A)'] dated 04.03.2025, for AY 2018-19.
Shri V.K Tulsian, appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that the assessee could not appear before the CIT(A) as the notices were never communicated to the assessee. Non-appearance before the CIT(A) was not intentional as the assessee would not gain anything from non-appearance before the First Appellate Authority. The Id. Counsel prayed for an opportunity to make submissions before the CIT(A). The Id. Counsel submitted that the assessee undertakes to respond to the notice(s) issued by the CIT(A), henceforth.
Shri Om Prakash, representing the department submitted that the assessee failed to respond to the multiple notices issued by the CIT(A). However, he raised no serious objection, if the matter is remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh hearing.
Both sides heard. The present appeal by the assessee is against an ex-parte order of CIT(A). Considering entire facts of the, we deem it appropriate to restore this appeal back to the CIT(A) for denovo adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law.
The CIT(A) shall issue notice to the assessee on the email id provided in ITBA portal as well as in Form No.36 i.e. [email protected].
The assessee is directed to respond to notice(s) issued by the CIT(A), without fail.
In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.