Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) without substantial discussion on merits, despite the assessing officer making additions for TDS default and interest. The assessee argued that the order was passed in violation of natural justice.
Held
The Tribunal noted that while the assessee did not respond to notices, the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without discussing the merits. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the order and remitted the matter back to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits, emphasizing the observance of natural justice.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without a proper discussion on the merits of the case, thereby violating principles of natural justice.
Sections Cited
250, 201(1A), 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH
(Assessment Year : 2016–17) Man Industries Vs. Assistant/Deputy (India) Limited Commissioner of Income 101, Man House, Tax, TDS, S.V. Road, TDS Circle-1(3), Vile Parle(West), Room no. 420, 4th Floor, Mumbai-400056. Cumbala Hill MTNL Telephone Building, Pedder Road, Dr. Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Cumbala Hill, Mumbai-400026. PAN/GIR No. AAACM2675G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Neha Paranjpe Revenue by Shri. R. R. Makwana, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing 02/01/2025 Date of Pronouncement 06/01/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (J.M): 1. This appeal has been preferred against the impugned order dated 11.09.2024 passed in Appeal no. NFAC/2014- 15/10131737 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income– tax(Appeals)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)
Man Industries (India) Limited [hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A)”] u/s. 250 of the Income- Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "Act"] for the Assessment year [A.Y.] 2015-16, wherein learned CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s appeal ex-parte.
Briefly stating the fact are that learned assessing officer had made additions of Rs. 1,78,65,575/- as TDS default and Rs. 1,19,73,813/- as interest u/s. 201(1A) of the Act, vide order dated 24.03.2022. Aggrieved, assessee filed an appeal before learned CIT(A), who dismissed assessee’s appeal ex-parte.
Appellant assessee has filed this appeal on the ground that learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the aforesaid additions.
We have perused the records and heard learned representatives for the parties.
At the very outset, learned representative for the assessee has, informed that the impugned order has been passed by learned CIT(A) as ex-parte in violation of the principles of natural justice. Prayed to set aside the impugned order.
Learned DR has submitted that assessee was provided sufficient opportunity of hearing by learned CIT(A) but for no avail. Learned DR has supported impugned order.
We notice that the assessee did not respond to the notices issued by the first appellate authority on three occasions. However, it is further noticed that learned CIT(A) passed ex- parte impugned order without any substantial discussion on the merits of the case, whereas learned CIT(A) was expected to state the points for determination, decision thereon and the reasons for the decision as provided u/s. 250(6) of the Act. In Man Industries (India) Limited the circumstances and in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it just and appropriate to afford last opportunity to the assessee and remit the matter back to the file of learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merits. 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. Assessee should refrain from seeking any adjournment but for compelling and unavoidable circumstances. Needless to say that learned CIT(A) shall ensure the observance of the principles of natural justice. It is made clear that we have not made any observation in respect of the merits of the case. The appeal is liable to be allowed accordingly.
In the result, the appeal is allowed in above terms for statistical purposes. Impugned order dated 11.09.2024 is set aside. Order pronounced in open court on 06.01.2025.