AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER NAVEEN CHANDRA [A. M]:
The above captioned appeal is preferred by the assessee against the orders dated 28.05.2025, by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as, “Act”] for A.Y. 2016-17.
At the outset, the Ld. AR vehemently argued that the principal of natural justice was not followed by the Ld. CIT(A) and he passed the order ex-parte. It is stated that the CIT(A) fixed the date of hearing on 16.05.2025, giving time for appearance on 25.05.2025. As the notice was not seen by the assessee, no attendance was made on the date ans as a result thereafter, the Ld. CIT(A) passed the order ex-parte on 28.05.2025.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We find that the assessee did not get adequate opportunities to represent himself as he was unaware of the notices sent to him. We find the reason for non-response to the notice is bona-fide and therefore, to meet the principle of natural justice, we are of the considered view that the assessee may be granted another opportunity to represent itself. We, therefore, direct the Ld. CIT(A) to afford three effective opportunity to the assessee to represent his case and adjudicate on the issues afresh. The assessee is also directed to avail the opportunities and present its documents/evidence as required by the Ld. CIT(A).
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.