Sudhir Kuamr Saini vs Income Tax Officer

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals); Addl./JCIT(A) [in short, the “CIT(A)”], Jodhpur’s order dated 12.08.2025 passed in DIN & Order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1079525777(1), involving proceedings under section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961; hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’.

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

For the reasons stated in the assessee’s condonation averments, delay of 158 days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

For the reasons stated in the assessee’s/Revenue’s condonation averments, delay of 158 days in filing of the instant appeal is condoned in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC).

Learned counsel submits that on account of communication gaps at various levels, the assessee could not appear to plead and prove all the relevant facts in the lower appellate proceedings and therefore, larger interest of justice would be met, in case, the matter may be restored back to the Assessing Officer. The Revenue vehemently support the learned lower authorities action making addition(s) herein on merits.

Be that as it may, the fact remains that possibility of some communication gaps at various levels in such an instance could not be altogether ruled out. It is therefore deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A) for his afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities of hearing at the appellant’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes