PARAMOUNT LOK KALYAN SAMITI,MUNGER vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD , BHAGALPUR

Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: These two appeals are filed by the same assessee against the separate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) [hereinafter referred to as “the ld. CIT(A)”)] both dated 26.12.2025 pertaining to the assessment years 2018-19 & 2019-20, u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”]. The details of the appeals are as under: - ITA No. 113/Pat/2026 for the assessment year 2018-19, arising out of the assessment order dated 10.08.2020 & ITA No. 114/Pat/2026 for the assessment year 2019-20, arising out of the assessment order dated 07.11.2020.

I.T.A. Nos.113 & 114/Pat/2026 Paramont Lok Kalyan Samiti ; AYs: 2018-19 & 2019-20 Since both the appeals pertain to the same assessee and involve identical issues, therefore, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order. However, for the sake of convenience, first we take up the ITA No. 113/Pat/2026 for the assessment year 2018-19 as a lead case, and the findings recorded therein shall apply mutatis mutandis to the other appeal. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, assessee is stated to be a charitable entity claim exemption of income for the assessment year under consideration. The claim of the assessee was disallowed by processing the return of income and in this connection, a rectification petition was filed by the assessee and said rectification order, the Assessing Officer did not allow the expenditure claim by the assessee while computing the income, thereby, benefit of the exemption as claimed by the assessee. 3. Aggrieved by the above rectification order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, it is noted from the appellate order that the assessee fails to appear on multiple occasions despite notice being issued. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) in absence of compliance dismissing the appeal ex-parte and sustain the order passed by the Assessing Officer. 4. Aggrieved by the above order, assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. At the time of hearing, despite repeated calls none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment application filed. It is observed from the record that notices were duly issued by the Registry. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. DR submitted that the appeals arise out of orders passed u/s 154 of the Act, which have limited scope confine to rectification of apparent mistake. As the assessee failed to comply before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) justified in dismissing the appeal

I.T.A. Nos.113 & 114/Pat/2026 Paramont Lok Kalyan Samiti ; AYs: 2018-19 & 2019-20 for non-prosecution. The appropriate remedy for the assessee if any lies against the original assessment order and not merely the rectification order. 6. We have considered the submission of the Ld. DR and perused the material available on record, it is observed that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal ex-parte due to none appearance of the assessee, and has not adjudicated the issues on merit while it is true that assessee fails to appear before the Ld. CIT(A). It is equally settled law that appeal should ordinarily be decided on merit rather than dismiss or non- prosecution, particularly when rights of the parties are involved. Further, the impugned order arises from the proceeding u/s 154 of the Act. Although the scope section 154 is limited to rectification of mistake apparent on record, the grievance of the assessee regarding the disallowance of expenditure and denial of exemption requires proper examination. Considering the principles of natural justice, and interest of fair play, we are of the view that assessee should be granted one more opportunity to present its case before the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the appeal afresh on merit after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to comply to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) and not to seek any unnecessary adjournment. In terms of the above, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Since the facts and issues involved in ITA No. 114/Pat/2026 are identical to those in ITA No. 113/Pat/2026, our findings and directions given herein shall apply mutatis mutandis to that appeal as well.

I.T.A. Nos.113 & 114/Pat/2026 Paramont Lok Kalyan Samiti ; AYs: 2018-19 & 2019-20 7. In terms of the above, both the appeals, being ITA Nos. 113/Pat/2026 and 114/Pat/2026, are allowed for statistical purposes.

Kolkata, the 24th April, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Laxmi Prasad Sahu] [Sonjoy Sarma] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 24.04.2026. DP, PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant - 2. Respondent - 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR)

//True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches