PROMISING EXPORTS PVT. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 11(1),, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1296/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 October 2025AY 2013-2014Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRIPRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred by dismissing the appeal ex-parte without a decision on merits. It restored the appeal to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, ensuring a reasonable opportunity of hearing for the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against an ex-parte order by the Ld. CIT(A) for AY 2013-14, which dismissed the appeal without deciding the merits, citing non-response to a notice under Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act. There was a 16-day delay in filing the appeal to the ITAT, which was condoned.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in passing an ex-parte order dismissing the appeal without considering the merits for non-compliance with a notice under Section 250(6), and if the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, KOLKATA

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, AR
For Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Hearing: 08.10.2025Pronounced: 15.10.2025

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 27.03.2025 for the AY 2013-14.

2.

It appears from the report of the registry that the appeal has been filed with a delay of 16 days. At the time of hearing the counsel of the assessee explained the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. The Ld. D.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. In our opinion, the delay is for bonafide and genuine reason, hence, we condone the delay and adjudicate the appeal.

3.

The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT (A) passed an ex-parte order without deciding the issue on merit

4.

The learned DR on the other hand fairly agreed that the appeal was dismissed ex-parte in limine and left the issue to the wisdom of the Bench.

5.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the first appellate authority has decided the appeal without deciding the issue on merit as the learned CIT (A) passed the order in limine, dismissing the appeal of the assessee on the ground that the assessee has not responded to the notice issued u/s 250(6) of the Act. In our opinion, the ends of justice would be well served if the appeal of the assessee is restored to the file of the learned CIT (A) for adjudication afresh. Accordingly, we restore the appeal of the assessee to the file of the learned CIT (A) to decide the issue on merit after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing the assessee.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 15.10.2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →