The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) for non-submission of replies to hearing notices. The assessee contended that replies were indeed filed and the CIT(A) failed to adjudicate the grounds of appeal on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without adjudicating the grounds on merits, despite the assessee claiming to have filed submissions.

Gaje Singh Rathore, Jodhpur vs ITO | s.250(6) | ITAT Jodhpur 2026

Q: What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's contention, stating that the CIT(A) has a statutory obligation to pass a speaking and reasoned order after considering the grounds raised. Dismissing an appeal for non-prosecution without adjudicating on merits is contrary to law.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Baid Advocate

For Respondent: Shri Bhawani Shankar Mathu, DCIT-DR

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 15/Jodh/2025 (Assessment Year – 2017-18) Gaje Singh Rathore Income Tax Officer, W-2(1) M/s SBL and Co LLP Jodhpur. Chartered Accountants, E-75, Kalpatru Shopping Center, Opp. Bioscope cinemas, Shastri Nagar, Jodhpur, Rajasthan-342003 PAN No. AYOPR2504E Assessee by Shri Gautam Baid Advocate (Physically) Revenue by Shri Bhawani Shankar Mathu, DCIT-DR (Virtual) Date of Hearing 20 / 05 / 2026. Date of Pronouncement 29 / 07 / 2026. ORDER PER: SUDHIR PAREEK, J.M. The aforetitled appeal has been preferred by the assessee/appellant against the order dated 28.11.2024 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short referred as ‘the Act’) passed by National Faceless Appeal Center, Delhi [for the sake of convenience, hereinafter referred to as NFAC/CIT(A)] by which appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed.

2 ITA No. 15/Jodh/2025 Asst. Year: 2017-18 2. Heard rival submissions and carefully scanned the material available on record.

Reiterating the grounds of appeal, the Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) erroneously dismissed the appeal by observing tht no submission made by appellant in response to notices of hearing issued during the pendency of appeal and dismissed the appeal without considering facts narrated in form 35 and grounds of appeal.

Per contra, the Ld. DR relied upon the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A).

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The grievance of the assessee is that the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on the premise that no submissions were filed by the assessee, whereas the assessee had, in fact, furnished replies in response to the notices issued during the pendency of the appellate proceedings. It has also been contended that the Ld. CIT(A) failed to adjudicate the grounds raised in Form No. 35 on merits.

3 ITA No. 15/Jodh/2025 Asst. Year: 2017-18 6. On perusal of the impugned appellate order and the material placed before us, we find merit in the contention of the assessee. The appellate authority, being the final fact-finding authority, is under a statutory obligation to dispose of the appeal by passing a speaking and reasoned order after considering the grounds raised and the material available on record. Even where the appellant remains absent, the appeal cannot be dismissed for non-prosecution simpliciter; rather, the issues raised are required to be adjudicated on merits in accordance with law.

In the present case, the impugned order reveals that the Ld. CIT(A) has not examined the grounds raised by the assessee on merits and has proceeded to dismiss the appeal without recording findings on the issues involved. Such an approach is contrary to the mandate of section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which requires the appellate authority to state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for such decision.

4 ITA No. 15/Jodh/2025 Asst. Year: 2017-18 8. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, we set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the entire matter back to the file of AO with a direction to adjudicate all the grounds of appeal afresh on merits after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to extend full cooperation and file all necessary submissions and evidences before the Ld. CIT(A).

Since we have restored the matter, grounds Nos. 2 to 4 are not being adjudicated at this stage and are left open for consideration by the Ld. AO in accordance with law.

10.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 29 / 07 / 2026 under Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules,1963.

Sd/- Sd/- (DR. MITHA LAL MEENA) (SUDHIR PAREEK) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Dated : 29 / 07 / 2026. Pritesh Vaishnav PS

5 ITA No. 15/Jodh/2025 Asst. Year: 2017-18

GAJE SINGH RATHORE ,JODHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), JODHPUR

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