IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.789/SRT/2023 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Virtual Court Hearing) Aakanksha Syntex Pvt. Ltd. A/712, India Textile Marketing Road, Surat- 382002 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1(1)(1), Surat, èथायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AACCA 0032 H (अपीलाथŎ/Appellant) (ŮȑथŎ /Respondent) िनधाŊįरती की ओर से /Appellant by Shri Aman Garg, CA िनधाŊįरती की ओर से /Respondent by Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख /Date of Hearing 13/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement 15/02/2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2011-12, is directed against the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short “NFAC/Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 17.10.2023, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), dated 29.12.2018. 2. Shri Aman Garg, Learned Counsel for the assessee at the outset, argued that impugned order passed by NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) is an ex parte order. The Ld. Counsel stated that during the appellate proceedings the assessee submitted adjournment application, 2 ITA No.789/SRT/2023/AY.2011-12 Aakanksha Syntex Pvt. Ltd. however, NFAC/Ld.CIT(A), did not consider the adjournment application and without giving further opportunities of being heard to assessee the order was passed ex parte, which is against the principle of natural justice. The Ld. Counsel therefore contended that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before Ld. CIT(A). 3. On the other hand, Learned CIT-DR for the Revenue argued, that assessee did not appear before Ld. CIT(A), inspite of giving lot of opportunities. To remit the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) means wasting of time and resources, therefore appeal of the assessee should be dismissed. 4. We have heard both the parties. Considering the above facts, we also note that NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) has not passed the order after considering the submission of assessee and assessment order. The order of Ld. CIT(A) is not as per the mandate of provision of Section 250(6) of the Act. Hence, we are of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead its case before the Ld. CIT(A). We note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest its case. Accordingly, we set aside the order of NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) and restore the issue back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merit. We also direct the assessee to furnish relevant documents and details before the Ld.CIT(A), as and when required by him and assessee shall co-operate in the proceedings 3 ITA No.789/SRT/2023/AY.2011-12 Aakanksha Syntex Pvt. Ltd. before the Ld.CIT(A) for disposal of its case. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed. 5. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced on 15/02/2024 in the open court. Sd/- Sd/- (PAWAN SINGH) (Dr. A.L. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER स ू रत/Surat Ǒदनांक/ Date: 15/02/2024 DKP Outsourcing Sr.P.S Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR/AR, ITAT, Surat 6. Guard File By Order // True Copy // Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Surat