Usha Singh vs Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)

PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:

The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 11/07/2025 for the Assessment Year 2015-16.

There is a delay of 83 days in filing the present Appeal. The Assessee filed an application coupled with an affidavit for condonation of delay contending that Assessee could not file the Appeal on time due to bona-fide unavoidable reasons including administrative difficulties and delay in obtaining profession advise.

For the reason mentioned in the application for condonation of the delay, the delay of 83 days in filing the present Appeal is hereby condoned.

Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 20/03/2023 under Section 147 r.w.s 144 read with section 144B of the Income-tax Act bymaking certain additions/disallowance. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 20/03/2023, Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 11/07/2025, dismissed the Appeal filed by the Assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee preferred the present Appeal.

The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee vehemently submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has provided no opportunity of being heard to the Assessee and in violation of principals of natural justice and the Ld. CIT(A) has erroneously upheld the addition made by the A.O. The Ld. AR has also taken us through the Paper Book filed by the Assessee and submitted that the addition has been made by the A.O. contrary to the material on record. Thus, sought for allowing the appeal.

Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative relying on the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) sought for dismissal of the Appeal.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It can be seen from the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the impugned order has been passed ex-parte without hearing the Assessee. It is further observed that while deciding the Appeals, the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided all the grounds of Appeal of the Assessee on its merits. Considering the facts that the Assessee has not participated in the first Appellate proceedings, in the interest of natural justice, we remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the Appeals afresh on its merits in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee.

In the result, the Appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose.