Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed a return for AY 2022-23, which was processed resulting in a higher total income. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. The assessee then appealed to the ITAT, arguing the CIT(A) erred by not deciding on merits.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A)'s order was passed in default and not on merits. Considering the interest of justice and fair play, the Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits after giving the assessee an opportunity to be heard.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without adjudicating on the merits of the case, and if the matter should be restored for a decision on merits.
Sections Cited
250, 143(1), 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘G’ BENCH
आदेश / O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (J.M): 1. This appeal has been preferred against the impugned order dated 21.08.2024 passed in Appeal no. ADDL/JCIT (A)-1 LUCKNOW/10005/2021-22 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income–tax(Appeals)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) [hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)”] u/s. 250 of the Income- Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "Act"] for the Yashraj Biotechnology Limited Assessment year [A.Y.] 2022-23, wherein learned CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s appeal for non-prosecution.
The brief facts under appeal state that the appellant assessee filed return of income for A.Y. 2022-23 on 29.11.2022, declaring total income of Rs. 7,17,89,880/-. The return was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act on 29.07.2023, determining the total income of Rs. 12,06,26,290/-. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before learned CIT(A), who dismissed assessee’s appeal for non-prosecution.
Assessee has filed this appeal on the ground that learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the aforesaid addition and not giving certain credits and interest levied by learned AO/CPC without going on the merits of the case in default of the appellant assessee.
Perused the records and heard learned representative for the assessee and learned DR for the revenue.
Learned representative for the assessee has submitted that the impugned order has been passed in default of the appellant which is not on merits of the case. Prayed to restore the matter back to the learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.
Learned DR has submitted that the assessee was provided various opportunities by learned CIT(A) but the assessee did not turn up before the first appellate authority for making submissions. Prayed to dismiss assessee’s appeal.
The perusal of the impugned order shows that learned CIT(A) issued notices to the appellant assessee for hearing on Yashraj Biotechnology Limited 03.11.2023, 02.05.2024, 07.06.2024 and 07.08.2024 but for no avail. We notice that the impugned order has been passed merely in default of the appellant but not on merits. Learned CIT(A) was required to state the points for determination, decision thereon and the reasons for the decision as provided u/s. 250(6) of the Act. In the circumstances and in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it just and appropriate to restore the matter back to the file of learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merits and to pass speaking order. We pass the order accordingly. We further direct the assessee to be diligent and cooperative in attending the hearings and making submissions before the learned CIT(A) for the expeditious and effective disposal. Needless to say, that learned CIT(A) shall ensure the observance of the principles of natural justice. The appeal is liable to be allowed accordingly.
In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Impugned order dated 21.08.2024 is set aside. Order pronounced in open court on 17.01.2025.