https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432785 The appeal raised concerns about fairness in the proceedings as the assessee claimed inadequate hearing opportunities, resulting in an ex parte order. The Assessing Officer added Rs.17,81,580 as unexplained investment based on cash deposits, leading to the appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC. The case was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication due to lack of timely communication and representation. The Judicial Member emphasized the importance of natural justice, granting the assessee another opportunity to contest the case on merit. The decision aimed to ensure fair hearings and compliance, ultimately allowing the appeal for statistical purposes. en-us Wed, 11 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Jan 2023 07:30:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432785 The appeal raised concerns about fairness in the proceedings as the assessee claimed inadequate hearing opportunities, resulting in an ex parte order. The Assessing Officer added Rs.17,81,580 as unexplained investment based on cash deposits, leading to the appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC. The case was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication due to lack of timely communication and representation. The Judicial Member emphasized the importance of natural justice, granting the assessee another opportunity to contest the case on merit. The decision aimed to ensure fair hearings and compliance, ultimately allowing the appeal for statistical purposes. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 11 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432785