Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) for non-compliance due to an accident. The assessee claims the addition of Rs. 7,60,000/- as cash deposits was erroneous and that their Form 26AS only showed Rs. 1,52,000/-. The assessee requested a remand for fresh adjudication.
Held
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) has no power to dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution and is obliged to decide the appeal on its merits. The order of the CIT(A) was set aside for de novo adjudication, with the direction to provide the assessee an opportunity to present necessary documents.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal for non-compliance without deciding on merits, or if the appeal must be adjudicated on its grounds, and whether the assessee's accident constitutes a sufficient cause for non-compliance.
Sections Cited
250, 250(4), 250(6), 251(1)(a), 251(1)(b), 251(2), 246A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE
Before: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
Assessment Year: 2019-20 Pandurang Maruti Abhang, V The Income Tax Officer, Flat No.203, Narayan Bag s Ward-5(4), Pune. Society, Lane No.8, Shiv Nagar, Kirkatwadi, Sinhagad Road, Pune – 411024. Maharashtra. PAN: Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Himanshu Choudhary – AR Revenue by Shri Madhan Thirmanpallil – Addl.CIT(DR) Date of hearing 15/05/2025 Date of pronouncement 15/05/2025 आदेश/ ORDER
PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)[NFAC], passed under section 250of the Income Tax Act, 1961; dated 29.01.2025 for Assessment Year2019-20. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :
“a. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the assessing officer has erred in adding the cash deposits amounting to Rs.7,60,000/- to the income of the assessee without considering the bank statements of the assessee. b. On the facts and circumstances of the case in in law, the assessing officer has erred in adding the cash deposits amounting to Rs.7,60,000/- without appreciating the fact that the cash deposit as reflected in Form 26AS is only Rs.1,52,000/-. c. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend to the grounds of appeal
, before or at the time of hearing.”
2. The ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) for the Assessee submitted that assessee’s appeal was dismissed by the ld.CIT(A) without discussing each and every ground and merits of the case and merely dismissed for non-compliance. Hence, ld.AR requested for one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
2.1 ld.AR for the Assessee filed a written submission which is reproduced as under : “1. We are in receipt of your notice to attend before your Good Honor in subject matter for Assessment Year 2019-20 on 15.05.2025.
In this regard we would like to state that during the course of the appellate proceedings before the Hon’ble CIT(Appeals) the appellant was unable to make the necessary submissions as the appellant had met with an accident which resulted in a type 6 fracture and was advised bed rest by the Doctors for a period of about 5 months. Please refer to Annexure attached herewith providing the details of the same.
Further the appellant is now in possession of the required documents such as Bank Statement, copy of Form 26AS, etc. to substantiate the claim from wherein it can be observed that no cash deposit amounting to Rs.7,60,000/- was made by the appellant.
In lieu of the above facts we request your Good Honor to kindly remand back the case to the Hon’ble CIT(Appeals) for verification of the above documents.” Submission of ld.Departmental Representative(ld.DR) : 3. The ld.DR for the Revenue relied on the order of Assessing Officer(AO) and ld.CIT(A)[NFAC].
Findings & Analysis : 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. It is noted from the order of ld.CIT(A) that ld.CIT(A) had issued notices dated 11.12.2024, 27.12.2024 and 06.01.2025, but Assessee failed to comply. We have noted that assessee met with an accident resulting in Fracture of Tibia. This is a sufficient cause for Non-Compliance.
4.1 It is observed from the order of the ld.CIT(A)[NFAC] that the ld.CIT(A)[NFAC] did not decide the grounds of appeal on merit, but merely dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of non- compliance. The ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated grounds raised by the assessee on merits.
4.2 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) asunder :
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 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.
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 15th May, 2025.