LAXMAN YADAV,FATEHGARH SAHIB V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

ITA 86/RAN/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Laxman Yadav against the order of the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2018-19. The primary contention was the alleged failure of the assessee to respond to multiple opportunities provided by the CIT(A) to present his case and furnish relevant details. The CIT(A) had confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer due to non-compliance by the assessee. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances, decided to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh examination, emphasizing the need for the assessee to actively participate and provide necessary documentation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 826116 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 03-04-2025
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 86/Ran/2025 (Assessment Year-2018-19) Laxman Yadav, C/o-Modern Steels Ltd., G.T. Road, Mandi, Gobindgarh, Fatehgarh Sahib-147203, Punjab. PAN No. AANPY 5111 H Vs. I.T.O., Ward 2(1), Jamshedpur. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Assessee represented by None Department represented by Shri R.C. Marndi, Sr.DR Date of hearing 07/01/2026 Date of pronouncement 07/01/2026 O R D E R PER: BENCH 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No. NFAC/2017-18/10236082 dated 08/02/2025 for the A.Y. 2018-19. 2. None represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri R.C. Marndi, Sr.DR appeared for the revenue. 3. The ld. Sr. Departmental Representative submitted that the ld. CIT(A) provided sufficient opportunities to the assessee, the assessee did not appear before the ld. CIT(A) and not furnished relevant details. He strongly supported the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). 4. We have considered the facts and we have also perused the orders of the lower authorities. A perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A) in the impugned case shows that the ld. CIT(A) has recorded in his order that multiple opportunities Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 86/Ran/2025 Laxman Yadav Vs ITO 2 had been given to the assessee right from 22/03/2024 to 23/01/2025 and the assessee has not chosen to comply with the notices issued to the assessee. As it is noticed that the assessee has not responded to the notices, the ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer in absence of any evidences produced. Considering the facts of the case, we are of the view that the assessee must be granted another opportunity to represent his case before the ld. CIT(A). In the circumstances, we restore the issues in the appeal back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to cooperate in the set aside proceedings before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee is also directed to furnish all the documents with its possession before the ld. CIT(A) to substantiate his claim. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order announced in open court on 07/01/2026. Sd/- Sd/- (RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ranchi, Dated: 07/01/2026 *Ranjan Copy to: 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. CIT 4. DR By order 5. Guard File Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Ranchi Printed from counselvise.com "