Loading judgment…
Facts
The Assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) for non-prosecution without adjudicating the grounds on merit. The Assessee contended that the dismissal was unjustified due to communication issues and reasonable cause, particularly during the Covid period. The assessee had also raised grounds regarding the disallowance of deduction u/s 80P.
Held
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution and should have adjudicated the grounds on merit, as per the High Court's ruling in Premkumar Arjundas Luthra. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution without adjudicating the grounds on merit, and whether the dismissal was justified in light of communication issues.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 144B, 80P, 246A, 251
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE
Before: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
Assessment Year: 2021-22 Satyamev Nagari Sahakari V The Income Tax Officer, Patsanstha Maryadit, s Ward-1(1), Nashik. 1, Maratha Tower, Raviwar Karanja, Nashik – 422001. Maharashtra. PAN: AAKAS2833C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by None Revenue by Shri Eknath Abhang – Add.CIT(DR) Date of hearing 30/10/2025 Date of pronouncement 30/10/2025 आदेश/ ORDER
PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:
This 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.2021-22 dated 17.06.2025 emanating from the Assessment Order passed under section 147 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 23.12.2022. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : “11 The learned CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in limine for non prosecution of appeal without passing a speaking order adjudicating the grounds of appeal and detailed contentions advanced vide Statement of Facts and supporting documentary evidences uploaded electronically at the time of filing appeal, without appreciating that the said action of the Id. CIT(A) was not justified in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in Premkumar Arjundas Luthra ((2017) 297 CTR 614].
2] Without prejudice to the above ground, the appellant submits that there was a reasonable cause due to which proper compliance could not be made before the A.O. in the course of the faceless asst. proceedings conducted during Covid period and therefore, it is prayed that the matter may please be set aside to the file of the A.O. for conducting asst. afresh after granting one more opportunity of being heard, in the interest of justice.
31 and Without prejudice to the above grounds, the appellant submits that there was a reasonable cause due to which the notices of hearing issued by the CIT(A) could not be complied with, in as much as, the notice of hearing were issued on the email id "satyamevnagaripatsanstha@gmail.com' not on the official email id 'satyamevnagari 1992@gmail.com' which was registered on Income Tax Portal for communication of notices and therefore, the matter may please be set aside to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after granting proper opportunity of being heard.
4] Without prejudice to the above grounds, the appellant submits that the disallowance of deduction u/s 80P of Rs.33,16,502 made by the A.O. in respect of the appellant credit cooperative society is not justified on facts and in law and hence, the said addition may be deleted.
51 The appellant craves leave to add/ alter/ amend any of the grounds of appeal.”
Submission of ld.DR : 3. Ld.Departmental Representative(ld.DR) for the Revenue relied on the Assessment Order.
Findings & Analysis : 4. We have heard ld.DR for the Revenue and perused the records. It is observed from the order of the ld.CIT(A) that the ld.CIT(A) did not decide the grounds of appeal on merit but merely dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-compliance. The ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated grounds raised by the assessee on merits.
4.1 The ld.CIT(A) during the appellate proceedings issued notices. Assessee failed to comply these notices. Therefore, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee and confirmed the assessment order.
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 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 4 251(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 file all the necessary documents before the ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open Court on 30 Oct, 2025.