AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
This assessee’s appeal arises against the CIT(E), Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/EXM/F/EXM43/2024-25/1 066452888(1) dated 05.07.2024, in proceedings u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) o f the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. It is accordingly procee ded ex-parte.
It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(E)’s de tailed discussion has proce eded ex-parte against the assessee thereby rejecting it’s section 12A registration application.
Mr. Om Prakash vehemently argues during the course of hearing in support of CIT(E)’s finding that the assessee had not filed any explanation or evidence supporting it’s case and there fore, his instant appeal deserves to be dismissed.
We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stand and are of the considered view that since the CIT(E) has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee , possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer and the arguing counse l could not be alto gether ruled out.
Faced with this situation, in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(E) for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and respo nsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accor dingly.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.