MOHD KAUSAR,AMROHA vs. ITO WARD - 1(4), AMROHA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The ITAT held that the CIT(Appeals) should have decided the appeal on merits rather than dismissing it for non-prosecution. The matter was restored to the CIT(Appeals) for a decision on merits.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(Appeals) was dismissed for non-prosecution. The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT against this dismissal.
What were the issues?
Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution without considering the merits of the case.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.2,267 citing38 ITD 320 · 1991 · ITAT
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, [ DELHI BENCH “S.M.C.” NEW DELHI ]
Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, S.M.C.
आदेश /O R D E R PER C. N. PRASAD, J.M. :
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Moradabad, [hereinafter referred to CIT (Appeals)] for the assessment year 2016-17 arising out of the assessment order passed under Section 144 read with Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution. 1
In spite of issue of notice none appeared. The appeal is disposed of on hearing the ld. DR on merits.
On perusal of the order of the ld. CIT (Appeals) it is observed that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the ld. CIT (Appeals) for non-prosecution. The appeal was dismissed ex- parte by the ld. CIT (Appeals) applying the decision of Delhi Bench in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del).
The ld. CIT (Appeals) should have disposed of the appeal on merits rather than dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution. Therefore, in the interest of justice this appeal is restored back to the file of the ld. CIT (Appeals) who shall decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law, after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on : 28/04/2022.
More judgments on Section 148
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Commissioner/Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax vs. M/S INDIA Agro Exports Private LimitedKarnataka · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Shivam Kumar vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 28 Oct 2026