PRITAM JAISWAL,DUMKA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(1), DEOGHAR, DEOGHAR

ITA 485/RAN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves two appeals by the assessee, Pritam Jaiswal, against the orders passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the assessment year 2018-19. The primary issue in both appeals was the disallowance of a deduction under section 57 of the Income Tax Act amounting to Rs. 52,33,425, which led to penalty proceedings under section 270A. The assessee's appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed due to non-compliance, prompting the current appeals to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Despite the absence of the appellant at the hearing, the Tribunal decided to remand the case for a fresh assessment, emphasizing the need for a fair hearing and a reasoned decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 787664 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 12-12-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH-RANCHI VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Accountant Member I.T.A. Nos.484 & 485/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Pritam Jaiswal…..……………......................…...........................……….……Appellant G1, Lakrapahari Maharo, Jama, Dumka, Jharkhand – 813101. [PAN: APGPJ5477B] vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Ranchi………..…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: None appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : November 10, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : November 17, 2025 ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: Both the captioned appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders passed by NFAC, Delhi for the assessment years 2018-19. Since the issues involved in both the appeals are common therefore the appeals are being heard together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. First, we proceed to deal with ITA No.484/Ran/2024. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and declared his return of income for the assessment year 2018-19 at Rs.4,32,890. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment in the case of the assessee disallowing the claim of deduction u/s 57 at Rs.52,33,425/- and accordingly penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act was initiated. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. Nos.484 & 485/Ran/2024 Pritam Jaiswal 2 3. Dissatisfied with the above order, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A) but the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee due to non-compliance. 4. Aggrieved by the above order, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. However, at the time of hearing, we find that no one appeared despite issuing consecutive notices from the Registry time to time informing about the hearing. Therefore, we proceeded to hear this matter with the assistance of ld. DR. 5. The ld. DR supported the orders of the authorities below. 6. We, after hearing the ld. DR and perusing the materials available on record, find that the assessee could not properly represent his case before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal by simply relying on the order of the Assessing Officer without going into the merits of the case. We, therefore, considering the facts of the case and in the interest of justice and fair play, remand back the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee to present his case and to pass a speaking order after considering explanations or submissions submitted by the assessee. We also direct the assessee to strictly comply with the notices issued by the Assessing Officer and furnish all relevant documents to substantiate his claim. 7. In terms of the above, ITA No.484/Ran/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes. 8. Since the facts and issues involved in ITA No.485/Ran/2024 are identical to those in ITA No.484/Ran/2024, therefore, our above decision in ITA No.484/Ran/2024 shall apply mutatis mutandis as well to ITA Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. Nos.484 & 485/Ran/2024 Pritam Jaiswal 3 No.485/Ran/2024. Accordingly, ITA No.485/Ran/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes. 9. In the result, both the captioned appeals are allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 17th November, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- [Ratnesh Nandan Sahay] [Sonjoy Sarma] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 17.11.2025. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches Printed from counselvise.com "