SURESHKUMAR,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NON CORP WARD 6(1), CHENNAI

Assessment Years: 2019-20 Suresh Kumar, Income Tax Officer, No.25/74C, 9th Street, Non-Corp Ward-6(1), Thiruvotriyur, Chennai. Chennai-600 019. [PAN: BGCPS5657N] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee by : Mr.K.Meenakshisundaram, ITP प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue by : Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 16.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 18.12.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER INTURI RAMA RAO, A.M :

This appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal), [‘CIT(A)’ in short], NFAC, Delhi, dated 12.09.2025 for AY-2019-20.

2.0 The appellant is an individual deriving income from business of transport, however no return of income under the provisions of section 139 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 filed by the appellant for the assessment year 2019-20. However, based on the information available that the appellant sold immovable property for consideration of Rs.36,58,810/-, the AO formed an opinion that the income escaped assessment from tax. Accordingly, a notice u/s. 148 was issued on 13.03.2023 after complying with the procedure laid down under provisions of 148A of the Act. The appellant neither complied with notice issued u/s 148 nor notices u/s 142(1) of the income tax act 1961. In the circumstances, the assessing authority passed best judgment assessment vide order dated 19.02.2024 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the income tax act 1961 at a total of Rs.2,55,68,780/- after making several additions.

3.0 Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. Hence, the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal.

4.0 We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on records. We find that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the appellant for non prosecution without entering into the merits of the addition. The CIT(A) without dealing with the contentions of the appellant merely dismissed the appeal in limine for non-prosecution. As contemplated u/s. 250(6) of the Act the CIT(A) is required to frame points of determination followed by a detailed discussion thereupon before passing the order. It is the settled position of law that the CIT(A), even while disposing of the appeal exparte, is duty bound to dispose of the appeal on Page - 2 - of 3 merits. Reliance in this regard can be placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra 279 CTR 614. Therefore, in the light of the above legal position, we are of the considered view that the matter requires to be remanded to the file of the CIT(A) with the direction to dispose of the appeal de novo on merits after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.