Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution without discussing the merits. The assessee had raised grounds challenging an addition made by the Assessing Officer under Section 147 and other related procedural issues.
Held
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erroneously dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution and has the power and obligation to decide appeals on merits, not merely on procedural grounds. The High Court's ruling was cited to support this.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution without deciding the merits? Whether reassessment proceedings under Section 147 are valid without proper grounds and evidence?
Sections Cited
250, 147, 144B, 251, 246A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE
ORDER
PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:
This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC] passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y.2013-14dated 08.07.2025 emanating from the Assessment Order passed under section 147 r.w.s 144B of the Act, dated 30.03.2022. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :
[A] “1. The Learned Assessing Officer had erred in making an addition of Rs.10,98,450/-. Considering the facts of the case and provisions of law, the addition may be deleted. Just and proper relief may be granted to the appellant.
2. Assessment order passed u/s 147 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide DIN NO.:ITBA/AST/S/147/2021- 22/1042122519(1) dated 30/03/2022 along with notice of demand dated 30/03/2022 is not tenable in law and therefore the same may please be cancelled.
The appellant craves to add, delete, modify withdraw any of the grounds before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.”
At the outset of hearing, no one appeared for hearing on behalf of the assessee. No adjournment letter filed.
Findings & Analysis : 3. We have heard ld.Departmental Representative(ld.DR) for the Revenue and perused the record. In this case, ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the Assessee for non-prosecution without discussing the merits of the case. The ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated grounds raised by the assessee on merits.
The relevant paragraph 8.1 to 9 of ld.CIT(A)’s Order are reproduced here as under : “8.1 Upon examination of the available records, it has been observed 2 that before the appellate authority the appellant has not furnished even [A] the basic and essential documents required to substantiate their claims. Some of these documents are Copy of Income Tax Return (ITRs)
Cash balance statements and details of withdrawals from the aforementioned bank
Calculation and justification of the commission income earned
A reconciliation of cash deposit and loan advancesas mentioned by the appellant in Renukamata Multi-State Co-operative Bank Ltd
Comprehensive computation of business income under the head "Profits and Gains of Business or Profession"
Cash book etc 8.2 In addition, the appellant has not submitted key financial records such as the ledger account, ITR, books of account, or any other documentary evidence that would enable verification of the claims made. Moreover, no cogent grounds, instance or explanations have been presented by the appellant to challenge the reassessment proceedings under Section 147, read with Section 1448 of the Income Tax Act.
8.3 It is pertinent to add here that laws assist those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights. This principle is embodied in the well-known maxim "Vigilantibus non dormientibusjurasubveniunt. It means equity comes to the aid of the vigilant and not the slumbering. in all actions, suits and other proceedings at law and in equity, the diligent and careful plaintiff is favoured and prejudicial of him who is careless. Viewed thus, it is presumed that the appellant has no further 3 [A] cogent reasoning or/and evidence to substantiate the grounds taken in this impugned appeal.
8.4 It can be seen that appellant has not furnished any reply and has not given any factual or legal details to come to conclusion different from that of AO. Even otherwise, it was for appellant to furnish cogent evidence in support of its grounds of appeal. This has not been done. Onus cannot be cast on this office to be an adjudicator and also a lawyer for the appellant when appellant is itself lax and uninterested in pursuing of his own appeal.
As a result, the appeal is held to be without merit and the same is hence dismissed.”
The Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) as under : Quote, “8.From the aforesaid provisions, it is very clear once an appeal is preferred before the CIT(A), then in disposing of the appeal, he is obliged to make such further inquiry that he thinks fit or direct the Assessing Officer to make further inquiry and report the result of the same to him as found in Section 250(4) of the Act.
Further Section 250(6) of the Act obliges the CIT(A) to dispose of an appeal in writing after stating the points for determination and then render a decision on each of the points which arise for consideration with reasons in support. Section 251(1)(a) and (b) of the Act provide that while disposing of appeal the CIT(A) would have the power to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul an assessment and/or penalty. Besides Explanation to sub-section (2) of Section 251 of the Act also makes it clear that while considering the appeal, the CIT(A) would be entitled to consider and decide any issue arising in the proceedings 4 [A] before him in appeal filed for its consideration, even if the issue is not raised by the appellant in its appeal before the CIT(A). Thus once an assessee files an appeal under Section 246A of the Act, it is not open to him as of right to withdraw or not press the appeal. In fact the CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits. In fact with effect from 1st June, 2001 the power of the CIT(A) to set aside the order of the Assessing Officer and restore it to the Assessing Officer for passing a fresh order stands withdrawn.
Therefore, it would be noticed that the powers of the CIT(A) is coterminous with that of the Assessing Officer i.e. he can do all that Assessing Officer could do. Therefore just as it is not open to the Assessing Officer to not complete the assessment by allowing the assessee to withdraw its return of income, it is not open to the assessee in appeal to withdraw and/or the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal on account of non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee. This is amply clear from the Section 251(1)(a) and (b) and Explanation to Section 251(2) of the Act which requires the CIT(A) to apply his mind to all the issues which arise from the impugned order before him whether or not the same has been raised by the appellant before him. Accordingly, the law does not empower the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal for non- prosecution as is evident from the provisions of the Act.” Unquote.
5.1 Thus, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has categorically held that ld.CIT(A) has to decide the appeal on merit and ld.CIT(A) does not have any power to dismiss appeal for non-prosecution.
In view of the above, in the interest of justice, we set-aside the order of the ld.CIT(A) to ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Ld.CIT(A) shall provide opportunity to the assessee. Assessee shall 5 file all the necessary documents before the ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, [A] grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Condonation of Delay : 8. There is a delay of 10 days in filing appeal before this Tribunal. Assessee has filed an Affidavit for condonation of Delay. We have perused the Affidavit and we are convinced that there is reasonable and sufficient cause for delay. Hence, Delay is condoned. Order pronounced in the open Court on 27 November, 2025.