MARIAS INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY,HOWRAH vs. ITO, WARD 48(1), , KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 467/KOL/2025Status: HeardITAT Kolkata17 September 2025AY 2012-13Bench: the Ld. CIT(A), where the appeal of the assessee was dismissed due to non- compliance on the various dates fixed for hearing. Ultimately, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the order of the Ld. AO by dismissing the appeal of the assessee.3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed for statistical purposes

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that the Ld. CIT(A)'s order was ex parte and that the assessee was not afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal remanded the entire issue back to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh examination, with a direction to provide the assessee a proper opportunity.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a charitable trust, filed its return for AY 2012-13. The case was reopened under Section 147, resulting in an addition of Rs. 1,06,20,990/- under Section 69 as unexplained investment. The Ld. CIT(A) subsequently dismissed the assessee's appeal ex parte due to non-compliance.

What were the issues?

Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex parte due to non-compliance and if the assessee should be granted a fresh opportunity to present its case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 69

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH”, KOLKATA

Appearances by: Assessee represented by : P.J. Bhide, AR Department represented by : Dheeraj , Sr. DR Date of concluding the hearing : 16.09.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 17.09.2025 O R D E R

PER SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

1.

This appeal arises from order dated 05.12.2023, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”) by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)].

2.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a charitable public trust, filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2012-13 by declaring total income of Rs. 35,820/-. Subsequently, the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the Act where the Ld. AO passed an order u/s 147/143(3) of the Act by making addition of Rs. 1,06,20,990/-

3.

Aggrieved by the above order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), where the appeal of the assessee was dismissed due to non- compliance on the various dates fixed for hearing. Ultimately, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the order of the Ld. AO by dismissing the appeal of the assessee.

4.

Dissatisfied with the above order, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal raising various grounds. However, the primary contention of the assessee is that the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is an exparte order and assessee could not afford the reasonable opportunity of being heard. Therefore, another chance may be given to the assessee so that the assessee can submit supported documents in order to substantiate its claim. He, therefore, prayed that instant order may be set aside to the filed of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to re-examine the issue afresh. On the other hand, the Ld. DR did not object to such prayer made by the assessee and he stated that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) was exparte due to non- compliance on the part of the assessee, therefore, direction may be issued to the assessee to comply the notice issued by the Ld. CIT(A) as and when fixed for hearing in the remand proceeding.

5.

We after hearing the rival submissions and perusing the material available on record. We find that in the present case, the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is an exparte order due to non-appearance on the part of the assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice, and fair play, it is necessary to remand back the whole issue to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to re-examine the issue afresh after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee, further with a direction to

6.

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

Order pronounced on 17.09.2025

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →