Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A)/NFAC. The Assessing Officer had proceeded ex-parte due to the assessee's unresponsiveness, making disallowances under section 69A. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without deciding on merits, citing non-filing of return and non-payment of advance tax.
Held
The tribunal held that the CIT(A)'s powers are co-terminus with the Assessing Officer and the appeal should have been decided on merits or remanded. The CIT(A) failed to issue a notice under section 250(2)(a), violating natural justice.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without deciding on merits and without adhering to principles of natural justice, and whether the ex-parte assessment order was justified.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 144B, 69A, 250, 250(2)(a)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHIBENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI
Before: Sh. Raj Kumar Chauhan&
ORDER
Per Raj Kumar Chauhan, Judicial Member:
The appeal of the assessee is directed against the order dated 24.10.2024of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)/NFAC”] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”] wherein, the appeal of the assessee was dismissed.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment letter was filed.
It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the ld. Assessing Officer’s detailed discussion has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act thereby making the corresponding disallowance made u/s 69A of the Act, due to the fact that assessee remained unresponsive during the assessment proceedings. The ld. CIT(A) in appeal has observed that since the assessee has not filed return of income as well as not paid an amount equal to the amount of advance tax which was payable by it, hence, not admitted the appeal and dismissed the same on this count, without deciding the appeal on merits of the case. Even otherwise, the ld. CIT(A) has not issued any notice u/s 250(2)(a) of the Act, which is in violation of principle of natural justice.
In view of the aforesaid factual matrix, we find that the power of first appellate authority are co-terminus to that of the Assessing Officer and it is incumbent upon the ld. CIT(A) to decide the appeal on merits or remand the case to the Assessing Officer for his afresh adjudication, which he has failed to do so. It is therefore deemed appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the ld. CIT(A) for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to fully cooperate with the Ld. CIT(A) during the proceedings and file all the necessary documents, if any, before the Ld. CIT(A), in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly.