DARASHAW KEKI MEHTA ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1)(1), MUMBAI

PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER;

The learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that ld. CIT(A) passed ex-parte order without discussing merits of the case. The assessee at the time of filing appeal furnished complete statement of facts, necessary for adjudication of the appeal. However, such fact is not considered by ld. CIT(A). At the time of hearing, the ld. AR of the assessee was confronted with the fact about non-compliance by five show cause notices under section 250 of Income Tax Act, issued by ld. CIT(A), the ld. AR of the assessee would submit that assessee engaged Sara & Associates, Chartered Accountant to represent the assessee before ld. CIT(A). The CA of the assessee inadvertently missed out necessary compliance. The CA of the assessee has given in writing about such non-compliance which was unintentional. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that assessee may be given one more opportunity to contest the case on merit. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that ld. CIT(A) has no jurisdiction to dismiss appeal on non- prosecution, rather he has to adjudicate the appeal on merit as per sub- section 6 of section 250 of the Income Tax Act. To support his submission, the ld. AR filed letter dated 23.06.2025 written by Rajesh Agarwal, Chartered Accountant from Sara & Associates Chartered Accountant. The ld. AR of the assessee also relied upon the decision of Tribunal in Ms. Swati Pawa Vs DCIT (2019) 103 taxmann.com 300 (Delhi-Trib) and in CIT Vs Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2016) 69 taxmann.com 407 (Bom).