KRISHNA SATYABODHA KULKARNI,DHARWAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), HUBBALLI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2112/BANG/2024Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 May 2025AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member), SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) failed to comply with Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act by not passing a speaking and reasoned order after affording an opportunity of being heard. The impugned orders were set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were dismissed in limine by the CIT(A) for non-appearance, despite several notices. The assessment order was passed under Section 147 r.w.s. 144/144B of the Act. The assessee did not present their case before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly dismissed the appeal for non-appearance without providing a reasoned order and an opportunity to be heard. Whether to restore the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, BANGALORE

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh V Mudhol, C.A
For Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Dept
Hearing: 07.04.2025Pronounced: 28.05.2025

PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

These appeals by the assessee are directed against the orders passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16. Since the issues involved in both appeals are identical, they are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.

2.

At the outset, it is observed that the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee in limine, on the ground that despite being served with several notices intimating the dates of hearing, the assessee failed to appear and avail the opportunity of being heard.

3.

Before us, the learned Authorized Representative (AR) submitted that the assessee may be granted one more opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A)/ AO, and assured the Bench that the assessee will fully cooperate and comply with all procedural requirements in the future proceedings.

4.

On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative (DR) strongly supported the orders of the authorities below and opposed the granting of any further opportunity to the assessee.

5.

We have carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. It is an admitted fact that the assessment was framed under section 147 r.w.s. 144/ 144B of the Act as evident from the assessment order. Similarly, there was no presentation during the appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT(A). While the Assessing Officer (AO) passed a detailed and reasoned order, running from pages 1 to 30, the learned CIT(A) merely dismissed the appeal without rendering any findings on merits. The dismissal was solely on account of non-appearance by the assessee.

5.1 It is pertinent to mention here that section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, mandates that the CIT(A) must pass a speaking and reasoned order after affording the assessee an opportunity of being heard. From the facts on record, it is clear that the learned CIT(A) failed to comply with this statutory obligation. In view of above, in the interest . of justice and fair play, we are inclined to grant one more opportunity to the assessee. Accordingly, the impugned orders of the CIT(A) are set aside, and the matters are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, after giving due opportunity to the assessee to present its case.

5.2 This relief is granted subject to the condition that the assessee shall fully cooperate during the proceedings and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments or cause unwarranted delays. Hence, the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, both the appeals (ITA Nos. 2111 and 2112/Bang/2024) filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in court on 28th day of May, 2025

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →