GANESH RAMNATH DHOOT,SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), AURANGANAD, AURANGABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2369/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 July 2026AY 2015-164 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) cannot dismiss an appeal for non-compliance or non-prosecution and must decide the appeal on merits. The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals before it.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals before the CIT(A) were dismissed for non-compliance. The assessee claimed that notices were not sent to the correct email address provided in Form No. 35, leading to the non-compliance. There was also a delay in filing appeals before the ITAT due to not receiving the CIT(A)'s order.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) has the power to dismiss an appeal for non-compliance or non-prosecution, and whether notices were properly served on the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 147,Section 144B,Section 246A,Section 251

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE

Before: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & SHRI Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

For Appellant: Shri Santosh B. Garud
For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Haladkar

आदेश /ORDER

PER Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, A.M : These two appeals are filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [Ld.CIT(A)], passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („the Act‟) for AYs 2014-15 and 2015-16 on 10.07.2025, emanating from the Assessment Order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, dated 08.05.2023 and 05.05.2023, respectively.

2.

We have heard both the parties and perused the records. For the sake of convenience and since issue involved is same, these two appeals were heard together and are disposed of by this common order.

ITA Nos.2368 & 2369/PUN/2025 Findings and Analysis :

3.

In this case, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals of the assessee on account of non-compliance. The Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) had not issued any notice on the email id provided in Form No. 35. It is also noted that the Ld. CIT(A) had issued notices on some different email id. The email id provided in Form No. 35 was ganeshdhoot.gd13@gmail.com. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeals of the assessee for non- compliance. There was a delay of 13 days in filing of both the appeals before this Tribunal as the assessee had not received the order u/s 250 of the Act. In these facts, we condone the delay of 13 days in filing of the appeals before this Tribunal. It is also observed that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals of the assessee for non-compliance after issuing notices. However, the Ld. CIT(A) had issued notices on some other email id and not on the email id mentioned in Form No. 35. This fact has not been rebutted by the Ld. DR. Therefore, there was a valid reason for the assessee for not responding to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A).

3.1 Even otherwise as per section 250 of the Act, the Ld. CIT(A) has to decide the appeal on merits. The Ld. CIT(A) do not have power to dismiss the appeal for non-compliance.

3.2 The Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals without adjudicating the grounds of appeal which is mandatory u/s 250(6) of the Act.

4.

The Hon‟ble Bombay High Court has held in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (Bombay) / [2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) as under :

ITA Nos.2368 & 2369/PUN/2025

Quote, “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 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. In fact the CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits. In fact 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.” Unquote.

5.

Thus, the Hon‟ble Bombay High Court has categorically held that Ld. CIT(A) has to decide the appeal on merit and Ld. CIT(A) does not have any power to dismiss appeal for non- prosecution.

ITA Nos.2368 & 2369/PUN/2025

6.

In view of the above, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set-aside to Ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. The Ld. CIT(A) shall provide opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

7.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 21st July, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे/Pune; दिन ांक/Dated : 21-07-2026 Ravi Kumar आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. The concerned Pr. CIT, Pune 4. DR, ITAT, „A‟ Bench, Pune 5. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →