HIMACHAL PRADESH BOARD OF EDUCATION, DHARMASHALA,KANGRA vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE, , PANCHKULA

The Assessee, in both the appeals, has raised as many as ten identical grounds of appeal. Despite issuance of notices by the ITAT, none appeared on behalf of the Assessee. However, from the material available on record, it is observed that both the appeals involve identical issues, which can be adjudicated even in the absence of the Assessee. Accordingly, we proceed to dispose of the appeals on merits, based on the material available on record.

At the outset, it has come to the notice of the Bench that the Authorized Representative (AR) of the Assessee, being aggrieved by the orders passed by the Assessing Officer, has directly filed the present appeals before the ITAT without first approaching the appropriate juri ictional appellate authority, namely the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) / National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), by way of filing an appeal in the prescribed Form No.

This mandatory statutory requirement has not been complied with in the present case, which reflects gross negligence on the part of the Assessee as well as its Authorized Representative.

It is further noted that this procedural requirement has been clearly specified in the assessment order dated 17.03.2025 passed by the Assessing Officer, which reads as under:— “6. If you intend to appeal against the assessment/time/penalty, you may present an appeal under part A of chapter XX of the Income Tax Act, 1961, to the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) of Income Tax/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) within thirty days of the receipts of this notice, in form no. 35 duly stamped and verified as laid down in that form.”

We find that the present matter is of a serious nature, wherein the Assessee has neither appeared before the Tribunal nor complied with the statutory requirement of filing appeals and requisite details before the lower authorities. Instead, the Assessee has directly approached the Tribunal by filing appeals without first availing the remedy before the first appellate authority. Such conduct reflects a lack of due diligence and adherence to the prescribed procedure. The Assessee is, therefore,

However, upon perusal of the material available on record and in the interest of natural justice, we are of the considered view that one more opportunity ought to be granted to the Assessee. Accordingly, the Assessee is permitted to file appeals before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), along with an application for condonation of delay, setting out detailed and sufficient reasons for such delay. In the event that the Assessee remains aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), it shall be at liberty to approach the Tribunal by filing an appeal within the prescribed period of limitation and in accordance with the procedure laid down under the provisions of the Income-tax Act.

In view of the foregoing, appeals in both the matters are dismissed and the Assessee is directed to follow the directions given above.

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are dismissed, in terms of the aforesaid observations.

""यथ"/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु"त/ CIT

"वभागीय ""त"न"ध, आयकर अपील"य आ"धकरण, च"डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड" फाईल/ Guard File