Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal arose from an order passed by the CIT(A)/NFAC for Assessment Year 2017-18, which was decided ex-parte. The assessee did not appear at the hearing. The CIT(A)/NFAC's decision was also based on an ex-parte assessment.
Held
The Tribunal held that given the ex-parte proceedings before the CIT(A)/NFAC and the possibility of communication gaps due to the new faceless hearing system, it was appropriate to restore the appeal.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte decision of the CIT(A)/NFAC is sustainable when there might have been communication gaps due to the new system of faceless hearings.
Sections Cited
144, 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman
ORDER
Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:
This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024–25/1070280228(1) dated 12.11.2024, in proceedings u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”)
Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC’s detailed discussion has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee thereby affirming the Assessing Officer’s action making the corresponding Azharuddin disallowances/additions herein. Nor do we find any substantive lower appellate adjudication as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act requiring the CIT(A)/NFAC to first frame points of determination followed by a detailed discussion thereupon.
Mr. Ramesh Chand vehemently argues during the course of hearing in support of CIT(A)’s finding that the assessee had not filed any explanation or evidence supporting it’s case and therefore, his instant appeal deserves to be dismissed.
We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stand and are of the considered view that since the CIT(A) has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer and the arguing counsel involving the newly introduced system of faceless hearings, could not be altogether ruled out.
Faced with this situation, in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.