Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ALLAHABAD “SMC”
Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM
स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : BBNPA4922L (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee by: None Revenue by: Shri A. K. Singh (Sr. DR) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing: 14/09/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 04/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R
PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM:
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi dated 15.06.2022 for AY. 2017-18.
None appeared for the assessee. At the outset, it is noted that assessee has filed application for condonation of delay 171 days for filing of appeal before this Tribunal. In this regard, it is noted that the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) was dated 15.06.2022 and the assessee has filed the same on 15.02.2023. According to the assessee, the impugned order got misplaced in the file and the assessee only realized the same on 01.02.2023. And thereafter, immediately filed the appeal before this Tribunal. In order to support the aforesaid explanation, assessee had filed an affidavit. Taking note of the contents of the affidavit and taking note that there was no deliberate intention on he part of assessee in not filing the appeal, I am inclined to condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing.
Nawab Ali Fatehpura Pakaddi 3. It is noted from perusal of ground no. 2 that the assessee is aggrieved by the action of the Ld. CIT(A) passing an ex-parte order without hearing the assessee. In this regard, the assessee claims that since the impugned action of Ld. CIT(A) was in violation of natural justice, the order needs to be interfered with.
Heard Ld. DR and perused the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) and I find that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order qua assessee. It is noted that the Ld. CIT(A) had issued notices on four (4) occasions i.e. 29.12.2020, 08.12.2021, 04.01.2022 and 25.02.2022. According to the Ld. CIT(A), despite giving opportunity, the assessee failed to comply with the notices, therefore, he was pleased to pass the order confirming the action of the AO. From a perusal of the impugned order, it is not discernable as to whether the notices could be served upon the assesse by post/online. And moreover, it is noted that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order without complying with the mandate of sub-section (6) of section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”). Needless to say that the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have complied with u/s 250(6) of the Act while adjudicating the grounds of appeal raised by assessee. Failure to do so requires interference from this Tribunal. Therefore, the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and restored back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide on merits, the grounds raised by assesse in accordance to sub-section (6) of section 250 of the Act. The assessee is directed to file written submission/relevant documents to support his grounds of appeal raised before Ld CIT(A), and request for hearing if he desires