IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.250/RJT/2023 ( नधा रणवष / Assessment Year: (2010-11) KishorsinhRamsang Jadeja Ra mkru pa, Vadin ar, T A Vadina r, Gujara t-361 001 Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1(4), Dwarka थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./P AN/G IR No. : ADIPJ2340R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by :None Respondent by : Shri Ashish Kumar Pandey,Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 30/05/2024 Date of Pronouncement : 31/05/2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. ARJUL LAL SAINI, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2010-11, is directed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) (National Faceless Appeal Centre) vide order dated 19.05.2023, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer, under Section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’], vide, order dated 01.11.2017. Page | 2 ITA No.250/RJT/2023 KishorsinhRamsangJadeja vs. ITO 2. Notice of hearing of this appeal was sent to the assessee at the address given by the assessee in Form No.36. The said notice has not been returned unserved. Today when the case was called for hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any request for adjournment was made. It means that assessee is not interested in prosecuting this appeal.Therefore, we have heard Ld. DR for the Revenue. The Ld. DR for the Revenue argued that in the assessee`s case under consideration, the assessment order was framed under Section 144 of the Act, as the assessee did not appear before the Ld. Assessing Officer. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) has passed ex parte order, as the assessee did not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) also. Therefore, Ld. DR for the Revenue argued thatassessee is negligent and did not care to attend proceedings, therefore, this kind of cases are remitted back to the file of the lower authorities for fresh adjudication. Therefore, Ld. DR for the Revenue contended that the matter may be remitted back to the file of lower authorities for fresh adjudication. 3. We have heard Ld. DR for the Revenue. We note that this Tribunal has granted adjournment two times and notices of hearing were sent through registered post. First notice of hearing was issued to the assesseeon 28 th March, 2024 and second notice of hearing was issued by the Tribunal on 1 st May, 2024. Neither the assessee nor his representative appeared before this Tribunal. Since, the assessment order in the assessee`s case is framed by the Ld. Assessing Officerunder Section 144 of the Act, as the assessee did not file any document or evidences, before the Ld. Assessing Officer. On appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee also did not appear and did not file any documents or evidences before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, we are of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before the Ld. Assessing Officer. Therefore, we deem it fit and proper to set Page | 3 ITA No.250/RJT/2023 KishorsinhRamsangJadeja vs. ITO aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. Assessing officer to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 31/05/2024 Sd/- Sd/- (DINESH MOHAN SINHA) (Dr. A.L. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Rajkot / दनांक/ Date: 31/05/2024 True Copy Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. Pr. CIT 5. DR/AR, ITAT, Surat0 6. Guard File By Order Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot