" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, AM. & DIESH MOHAN SINHA, JM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 295/RJT/2024 (Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year: (2014-15) (Hybrid Hearing) Coal Corporation, 8 A National Highway, Kandla Road, Timbali, Patiya Opp. Delta Station, Morbi - 363642 Vs. Income Tax Office, Ward – 1, Morbi - 363642 èथायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AIYPP2374E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld. CIT(DR) सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/ Date of Hearing : 31/12/2024 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 31/12/2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15, is directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), [in short “the ld. CIT(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short ‘the NFAC’), Delhi, dated 28.02.2024, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144 dated of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 2. Brief facts of the case: Page | 2 ITA No.295/RJT/2024 Assessment Year.2014-15 Coal Corporation v. ITO 1) Appellant firm is engaged in the business manufacturing and trading of coal. Return of income for the AY 2014-14 was filed on 25.07.2014 declaring therein income of Rs. 32,80,490/-. 2) Subsequently, assessment framed u/s. 143(3) of the Act dated. 28.12.2016 determining income at Rs. 1,35,12,840/- by making an addition on account if unexplained credit u/s. 68 being difference between assessee’s account and account of sundry creditors and unsecured loans in the business. 3) Thereafter again case is re-opened u/s. 147 by issuing the notice u/s. 148 of the Act dated 26.02.2022 on the basis of the information received from DDIT/ADIT, Gandhigram the assessee has shown bogus transaction with Nishant Mukesh Shah, Prop of M/s. Vishweshvari International of Rs. 4,05,50,000/- during the relevant year. 4. Assessment framed ex-parte u/s. 144 of the Act by Making the addition of Rs. 4,05,50,000/- as income. 5. The assessee challenged the legality and validity of order of Ld. ITO dated. 25.04.2023 by filing of an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). 6. The Learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the revenue. The appeal is dismissed by the Ld. CIT on account of non-compliance by the assessee. That the assessee is in appeal before this tribunal. Page | 3 ITA No.295/RJT/2024 Assessment Year.2014-15 Coal Corporation v. ITO 7. During the course of hearing, Ld. A.R. submitted that the furnished closed on 2014-15 and the assessee was not aware about the proceedings and going on with the IT authority. This is requested for an opportunity may kindly be granted. To submit the document before the lower authority. 8. On the other hand, ld. DR has submitted that a number of notices were issued by the Ld. CIT(A), and due opportunity was provided to the assessee but the assessee did not comply with the notices. The ld. D.R. has not objected if the matter is remanded back to the ld. AO for fresh adjudication. 9. We have heard both the parties and perused the documents available on record. It is noted that the four notices issued by the ld. CIT(A) for hearing on dated 20.07.2023, 18.12.2023, 08.02.2024 and 20.02.2024 of the case but nobody comply with the notice and the notices were also issued by the Ld. ITO for hearing on dated. 28.12.20222, 29.01.23, 27.01.2023, 03.02.2023 and 22.03.2023 nobody compliance with the notice. We noted that the assessee firms closed on business the notice was not served ess activities the assessee was unaware with the proceedings going on with the income tax authority. During the course of hearing AR has undertaken his responsibility to represent the case before the AO. we are of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to present his case before lower authority and remand the matter back to the file of the Ld. AO for fresh adjudication on merits, after giving an opportunity to be heard the assessee directed to submit all the required documents in support of the income earned during the year. Page | 4 ITA No.295/RJT/2024 Assessment Year.2014-15 Coal Corporation v. ITO 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 31 - 12 - 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (A. L. SAINI) (DINESH MOHAN SINHA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Rajkot Ǒदनांक/ Date: 31 / 12 /2024 Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. Pr. CIT 5. DR/AR, ITAT, Rajkot 6. Guard File By Order Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot "