What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(Appeals) failed to comply with the mandate of Section 250(6) by not recording reasons for his conclusion and not deciding the appeal on merit. The order of the CIT(Appeals) was not sustainable.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(Appeals) was dismissed for non-prosecution. The CIT(Appeals) passed a brief order without discussing the merits of the case, despite issuing notices and receiving adjournment requests.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Appeals) order dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without deciding on merits and without proper reasoning is sustainable.

M/S. Nilkanth Heights Pvt. Ltd. vs I.T.O., Ward - 3(1) | ITAT Kolkata 2023

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 2nd September, 2022 passed for A.Y. 2012-13.

Assessment Year : 2012-2013 M/s. Nilkanth Heights Pvt. Limited 2. The order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) is a very brief order and the relevant part reads as under:- “The appellant was sent notices of hearing/submission on 22.01.2021, 15.11.2021 & 22.08.2022. There were adjournment requests only on 09.12.2021, 21.12.2021 & 07.04.2022, but no reply/submission was received from the appellant afterwards. Therefore, it seems appellant has no interest in pursuing the appeal. Hence, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the assessing officer. In sum, appeal is dismissed”.

A perusal of the above order would suggest that it is not in consonance with the mandate given in sub-section (6) of section 250. Sub-Clause (6) would contemplate that the ld. CITA would state the points in dispute and thereafter record reasons in support of his conclusion on those points. In the present case, ld. CIT(Appeals) failed to record any reason on the points, which are discussed by the ld. Assessing Officer. It is also observed that a perusal of the above order would suggest that the last notice was issued on 07.04.2022 but the impugned order of dismissal has been passed on 02.09.2022, i.e. almost five months of the alleged notice given to the assessee, which was not attended. The ld. CIT(Appeals) ought to have given a notice to the assessee, if there was such a gap. The ld. CIT(Appeals) was bound to decide the appeal on merit even if it is an ex-parte order, therefore, it is not sustainable. We, therefore, set aside the order of ld. CIT(Appeals) and remit this issue to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) for adjudication on merit. The ld. Assessment Year : 2012-2013 M/s. Nilkanth Heights Pvt. Limited CIT(Appeals) would issue fresh notice of hearing to the asseessee.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on October 10, 2023.

M/S. NILKANTH HEIGHTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments