RANABIR PAUL,GUWAHATI V. ACIT CIR-2, GUWAHATI

ITA 120/GTY/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Ranabir Paul, the appellant, who appealed against the orders of the Learned Assessing Officer (AO) and the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi. Both the AO and the CIT(A) had passed ex-parte orders due to insufficient communication between the assessee and his tax consultant. The tribunal, considering the circumstances and the submissions of both parties, decided to remand the case back to the AO for a fresh assessment, providing the assessee another opportunity to present his case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 782918 (ITAT-GUWAHATI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 15-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL GUWAHATI BENCH, GUWAHATI (VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA) SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 120/GTY/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Ranabir Paul, Paltan Bazar, Rchabari, S.O. Guwahati, Kamrup, Guwahati - 781008 [PAN: AJNPP5465G] .....................…...……………....Appellant vs. ACIT, Cir-2, Aayakar Bhawan, Christian Basti, G.S. Road, Guwahati - 781005 ........................................ Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : J.P. Gupta, FCA Department represented by : Kausik Ray, JCIT Date of concluding the hearing : 13.10.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 28.10.2025 ORDER PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. The present appeal arises from the order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”), dated 30.03.2025, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)]. 1.1. In this case, right at outset, the Ld. AR pointed out that the assessee did not get sufficient opportunity to present its case due to a communication gap between the assessee and his tax consultant. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No. 120/GTY/2025 Ranabir Paul 2 1.2 It is seen that the Ld.AO has passed an exparte order and so has the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR pleaded that in case the assessee is allowed a second chance to present the facts, then he would readily do so. 1.3 The Ld. DR was not having any objection in case the matter was to be remanded back for fresh consideration. 2. We have carefully considered the impugned order and the order of Ld. AO as also the averments of Ld. AR/DR. It is felt that in the interests of substantive justice, the assessee deserves a chance to prove his bonafides and thus we set aside the impugned order and remand the same to the file of Ld. AO for fresh assessment. The assessee is expected to comply to all the notices issued by the Ld. AO and in case he does not do so then the Ld. AO would be free to take an adverse view. 3. With these remarks, this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 28.10.2025 Sd/- Sd/- [Manomohan Das] [Sanjay Awasthi] Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 28.10.2025 AK, Sr. PS Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No. 120/GTY/2025 Ranabir Paul 3 Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR) //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches Printed from counselvise.com "