ASHOK JAIWANTRAO KULKARNI,NANDED vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, NANDED

04.04.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [“CIT(A)”] relating to the Assessment Year 2013-14. filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 24.06.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [“CIT(A)”] relating to the Assessment Year 2014-15. filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 14.06.2024 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [“CIT(A)”] relating to the Assessment Year 2015-16.

For the sake of convenience, all these three appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

All the above three appeals filed by the assessee were disposed by the ld.CIT(A)/NFAC vide separate orders dismissing the appeals of the assessee for non-prosecution. However, he has not decided the issue on merits in all these three appeals.

Ld. Counsel for the assessee who appeared on behalf of the assessee for all the three appeals captioned above submitted that in the interest of justice the assessee should be given an opportunity to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details. He further submitted that the ld.CIT(A)/NFAC has also not decided the appeals on merit although the submissions were made before him as per the statements of fact.

Ld. Departmental Representative on the other hand submitted that despite number of opportunities granted by ld.CIT(A)/NFAC, the assessee did not file any reply for which the ld.CIT(A)/NFAC was constrained to pass the ex parte orders dismissing the appeals of the assessee.

We have heard the rival contentions made by both the sides and perused the record. It is an admitted fact that despite number of opportunities granted by ld.CIT(A)/NFAC there was non-compliance from the side of the assessee for which he was constrained to pass exparte orders dismissing the appeals filed by the assessee. It is also an admitted fact that the ld.CIT(A)/NFAC has not decided the appeals on merit in line with the provisions of section 250(6) but dismissed the appeals for non-prosecution.

A perusal of the above provision shows that ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is supposed to pass the order in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision. However, in the instant case he has not done so. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issues raised in all the aforesaid appeals to the file of ld.CIT(A)/NFAC with a direction to give one last opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case and decide the appeals as per fact and law by passing a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act. The assessee is also hereby directed to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details before ld.CIT(A)/NFAC on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which the ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in all the three appeals are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.