SAMBHAJI BALKRISHNA MULIK,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 10(1), PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 33/PUN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 May 2026AY 2020-213 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) is obliged to decide the appeal on merits and does not have the power to dismiss it for non-prosecution. The order of the CIT(A) was set aside for de novo adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT with a delay of 128 days, which was condoned. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without adjudicating the grounds of appeal, despite the assessee failing to file details after multiple opportunities.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution without adjudicating the grounds of appeal. The obligation of the CIT(A) to decide appeals on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 251

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa Khare
For Respondent: Shri Sandeep Sathe, JCIT

PER Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, A.M : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act 1961 dated 19.06.2025 for AY 2020-21.

2.

There was a delay of 128 days in filing appeal before this Tribunal. We have perused the condonation petition filed by the assessee and observed that there was sufficient and reasonable cause for the delay. Substantial justice is more important than procedural delays. No assessee is going to gain anything by delaying the appeal. Accordingly, we condone the delay.

3.

We have heard both the parties and peruse the records.

4.

Ld. AR submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order without adjudicating the grounds of appeal.

5.

Ld. DR relied on the order of CIT(A) and AO.

ITA No. 33/PUN/2026

6.

In this case Ld. CIT(A) has provided five opportunities to the assessee, but assessee failed to file details. Therefore, Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the Assessee without adjudication grounds of appeal raised by assessee.

6.1. 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 : 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.

ITA No. 33/PUN/2026

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

6.2. Respectfully following the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, we set aside the order u/s. 250 of the Act to Ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Ld.CIT(A) shall provide opportunity to the assessee. Assessee shall file all the relevant details before the Ld.CIT(A).

7.

Accordingly, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 25th May, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे/Pune; दिन ांक/Dated : 25-05-2026 TNMM आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: अपील र्थी / The Appellant 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 2. 3. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune 4. DR, ITAT, ‘SMC’ 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 251

All 1,124 judgments and leading authorities on Section 251 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →