K P AUTOMOBILES PRIVATE LIMITED,RANCHI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A), RANCHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 303/RAN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi17 April 2026AY 2023-243 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of delay without adjudicating the issues on merit. The Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(A) to consider the condonation of delay and decide the appeal on merit.

What were the facts?

The assessee's case was selected for scrutiny due to low net profit, and statutory notices were issued. The assessee failed to comply, leading to an ex-parte assessment. The assessee then filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 66 days.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal in limine due to delay without considering the merits of the case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 144,Section 250,Section 249(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, – RANCHI BENCH

Before: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL – RANCHI BENCH VIRTUAL BENCH AT KOLKATA Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Accountant Member ITA No.303/RAN/2025 Assessment Year: 2023-24 K P Automobiles Private Limited………………………………………...Appellant 510, Industrial Area Kokar, Ranchi Jharkhand-834001 [PAN: AAFCK0101N] vs. CIT(A), Ranchi…….………………………..……...…..…..Respondent Jharkhand-834001 Appearances by: Shri Manjeet Verma, AR, appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Shri Kailash Gautam, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : April 15, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order : April 17, 2026 ORDER Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20.08.2025 of the NFAC, Delhi [‘CIT(A)’] passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2023-24. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny under CASS primarily to examine issues relating to low net profit. Accordingly, statutory notice u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued. However, assessee failed to comply with the notices issued during the assessment proceedings. In view of non-compliance, the Assessing Officer proceeded to complete the assessment u/s 144 of the Act. During the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer observed that unexplained cash credit amounting to Rs.47,14,000/- which were

ITA No.303/Ran/2025 K P Automobiles Private Limited not satisfactorily explained by the assessee. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer treated the said amount as unexplained income and completed the assessment by determining the total income at Rs.1,44,97,923/- as against the return income.

3.

Aggrieved by the above order, assessee went in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, there was a delay of 66 days in filing the appeal and the Ld. CIT(A) without condoning the delay and without examine the merit of the case dismissed the appeal in limine, holding that no sufficient cause for delay was shown within the meaning of section 249(3) of the Act.

4.

Still aggrieved by the above order, assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law, and the Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of delay without adjudicating the issues on merit. He further stated the delay was neither intentional nor deliberate and the assessee should be afforded an opportunity of being heard.

5.

On the other hand, the Ld. DR supported the order of lower authorities below and submitted that the assessee failed to comply with the statutory notices during the assessment proceedings even before the Ld. CIT(A), no sufficient cause for delay was substantiate. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal.

6.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record, it is observed that the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal solely on the ground of delay without adjudicating the issues on merit. In our considered opinion, the appellate authority is expected to decide the appeal on merit specially when substantial addition has been made in the assessment. Following the principles of natural justice, it requires

ITA No.303/Ran/2025 K P Automobiles Private Limited that an assessee should be provided adequate opportunity to present its case and the dismissal of the appeal in limine without adjudicating on the merit defect the purpose of appellate remedy. Accordingly, in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it appropriate to set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file with a direction to considered the issue of condonation of delay in accordance with law, and thereafter, adjudicate the appeal on merit after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

5.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Kolkata, the 17th April, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Ratnesh Nandan Sahay] [Sonjoy Sarma] Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 17.04.2026. 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

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →