" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री राजेश क ुमार, लेखा सदस्य क े समक्ष । (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.84/CTK/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-2012) Saroj Devi Jhanwar, At/PO: Motiganj, Balasore Vs ITO, Ward-1, Balasore PAN No. :AAWPJ 1286 D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty,Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 07/04/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 07/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 16/12/2024, passed in ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1071247159(1) for the assessment year 2011-2012. 2. Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue. 3. It was submitted that the assessee is now residing in Odisha at the address provided in Form 36. It was the submission that the assessee was residing in Rajasthan at the address mentioned in the order of the ld. CIT(A). It was the submission that the assessee was residing in Odisha and the assessee could not appoint the necessary counsel to get his assessment proceedings conducted. It was the prayer that the issues may ITA No.84/CTK/2025 2 be restored to the file of ld. Assessing Officer for readjudication and the assessee shall undertake to make necessary arrangement to have his assessment properly done. 4. In reply, ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the ld. Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A). It was the submission that the assessee should have been more cautious in his tax matter. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. It is noticed that the assessment order as well as the order of the ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte orders. It is noticed that the address mentioned in Form 36 is in his order and is entirely different from that as mentioned in the order of the assessment order and the order of the ld. CIT(A). As the explanation given by the assessee has been found to be true, in the interest of justice, the issues in the appeal is restored to the file of Assessing Officer for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 07/04/2025. Sd/- (राजेश क ुमार) (RAJESH KUMAR) Sd/- (जाजज माथन) (GEORGE MATHAN) लेखा सदस्य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER ददनाांक Dated 07/04/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथी / The Appellant- 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent- 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), ITA No.84/CTK/2025 3 आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कटक/ITAT, Cuttack 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, कटक / DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. गार्ज फाईल / Guard file. सत्यापपत प्रयत //True Copy// "