DINESH CHHAGANLAL RATHOD,PUNE vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 7 PUNE, PUNE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A)/NFAC is obligated to decide appeals on merits and cannot dismiss them for non-prosecution, citing a Bombay High Court judgment. Therefore, the case was restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for adjudication on merits.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC was dismissed in limine for non-prosecution, without addressing the merits of the case. The Assessing Officer had made significant additions to the assessee's income.
What were the issues?
Whether an appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution by the CIT(A)/NFAC, or if it must be decided on merits. Whether principles of natural justice were violated by not granting a proper opportunity.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2020-21 is directed against the order dated 17.01.2026 of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of Assessment order dated 24.03.2025 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144B of the Act.
We will first take up Ground No.1 through which the assessee has prayed that since the impugned order is exparte and no proper opportunity has been granted and there being violation of principles of natural justice, therefore one more
2 Dinesh Chhaganlal Rathod
opportunity may be granted. Ld. DR objected to the submissions made by ld. Counsel for the assessee
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee is an individual and assessment for A.Y.2020-21 concluded u/s.147 r.w.s.144B of the Act and against the income of Rs.28,60,050/- declared in the return filed in response to notice u/s.148 of the Act ld. Assessing Officer made various additions amounting to Rs.14,16,28,700/- against which the assessee filed appeal before ld.CIT(A) but then failed to respond to the notices of hearing and also did not file any submission except seeking adjournment on one occasion. Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine without dealing with merits of the case.
In this regard, reference is being made to the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT (Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) wherein the Hon’ble Court held that ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits ld.CIT(A)/NFAC does not have any power to dismiss appeal for non-prosecution. Relevant observation of the Hon’ble High Court reads as under :
“8. From the aforesaid provisions, it is very clear once an appeal is preferred before the CIT(A), then in disposing of the appeal, he is obliged to make such further inquiry that he thinks fit or direct the Assessing Officer to make further inquiry and report the result of the same to him as found in Section 250(4) of the Act. Further Section 250(6) of the Act obliges the CIT(A) to dispose of an appeal in writing after stating the points for determination and then render a decision on each of the points which arise for consideration with reasons in support. Section 251(1)(a) and (b)of the Act provide
3 Dinesh Chhaganlal Rathod
that while disposing of appeal the CIT(A)would have the power to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul an assessment and/or penalty. Besides Explanation to sub-section (2)of Section 251 of the Act also makes it clear that while considering the appeal, the CIT(A) would be entitled to consider and decide any issue arising in the proceedings before him in appeal filed for its consideration, even if the issue is not raised by the appellant in its appeal before the CIT(A). Thus once an assessee files an appeal under Section 246A of the Act, it is not open to him as of right to withdraw or not press the appeal. Infact the CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits. Infact with effect from 1st June, 2001 the power of the CIT(A) to set aside the order of the Assessing Officer and restore it to the Assessing Officer for passing a fresh order stands withdrawn. Therefore, it would be noticed that the powers of the CIT(A) is coterminous with that of the Assessing Officer i.e. he can do all that Assessing Officer could do. Therefore just as it is not open to the Assessing Officer to not complete the assessment by allowing the assessee to withdraw its return of income, it is not open to the assessee in appeal to withdraw and/or the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal on account of non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee. This is amply clear from the Section 251(1)(a) and (b)and Explanation to Section 251(2) of the Act which requires the CIT(A) to apply his mind to all the issues which arise from the impugned order before him whether or not the same has been raised by the appellant before him. Accordingly, the law does not empower the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution as is evident from the provisions of the Act.”
We on due consideration of Ground No.1 raised by the assessee and also observing that ld.CIT(A)/NFAC has not dealt with merits of the case, deem it appropriate to restore the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A)/ NFAC for necessary adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A/NFAC) in the set aside proceedings shall afford reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Assessee is directed to provide updated email id and contact detail to the department for receiving the notices from ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause.
4 Dinesh Chhaganlal Rathod
Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 28th day of July, 2026. (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 28th July, 2026. Satish
Satish Kumar Madishetty आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent.
The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “A” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,
////
More judgments on Section 147
- 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
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl.Dev Construction vs. The Proper OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Abbal Dass Arya vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax CommissionerUttarakhand · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Darbesh Medical Enterprise vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 15 Oct 2026
- Gr Infra Projects Limited Ratlam Through Its Authorized Signatory Mr. Pankaj Das vs. The State Of Madhya PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 14 Oct 2026