Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed four appeals against ex-parte appellate orders passed by the CIT(A) for Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12. The appeals were dismissed for non-prosecution despite the assessee not requesting email hearing notices.
Held
The Tribunal noted the assessee's non-cooperation in both the first and second rounds of appeal. Despite the repeated dismissals, the Tribunal decided to give the assessee one more opportunity for hearing.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte orders passed by CIT(A) for non-prosecution were justified, and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity for hearing.
Sections Cited
144, 271(1)(c), 46A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH
Before: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha
to 1377/Ahd/2025 Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Liz Hemangbhai Bhatt Income Tax Officer 301,A Devpreet, Ward-5(1)(2), Apartment, Vs Ahmedabad Near Akasmeen Bunglow, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad Jurisdiction AO: Gujarat-380054, India The DCIT Circle-3(1)(1), PAN: ADTPB9174C Ahmedabad, (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented: Ms. Arti N Shah, A.R. Revenue Represented: Smt. Ananya Kulshresth, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing : 28-11-2025 Date of pronouncement : 02-12-2025 आदेश/ORDER PER BENCH:-
These four appeal are filed by the Assessee as against four separate appellate orders all dated 20.03.2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “CIT(A)”), arising out of the exprate assessment orders passed under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and Penalty orders under section 271(1)(c) of the Act to 1377/Ahd/2025 A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2011-12 Page No 2 Liz Hemangbhai Bhatt VS. ITO (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to Assessment Years 2010-11 & 2011-12 respectively.
The registry has noted that there is a delay of 30 days in filing the above appeals. The Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee stated that she has not received email hearing notices on 02-12- 2024, 30-12-2024, 27-01-2025 and 18-02-2025 but the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeals for non-prosecution vide common order dated 20-03-2025. However perusal of Form No. 35 filed before Ld. CIT(A), assessee categorically mentioned not to send hearing notices by email. Thus when the assessee verified the Income Tax portal came to know about the exparte appellate orders passed by Ld. CIT(A) both on quantum appeals as well as penalty appeals orders. Thus there is a delay of 30 days in filing the above appeals and requested to condone the delay.
The Ld. Sr. D.R. appearing for the Revenue submitted that this is the second round of appeal before this Tribunal. In the first round of appeal, Ld. Tribunal vide order dated 10-02-2023 in to 717/Ahd/2019 set-aside appeals to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration. However the assessee again not participated in the hearing before Ld. CIT(A). Therefore the appeals are liable to be dismissed.
We have given our thoughtful consideration and perused the materials available on record. In the first round of appeal before Ld. CIT(A), assessee filed written submission and also vide letter dated 22-02-2018 requested to admit additional evidences invoking Rule to 1377/Ahd/2025 A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2011-12 Page No 3 Liz Hemangbhai Bhatt VS. ITO 46A of the I.T. Rules. The assessee also furnished Remand Report dated 08-03-2019 submitted by the A.O. Finally when Ld.CIT(A) fixed the appeal for hearing on 25-03-2019, assessee sought for adjournment which was rejected by Ld. CIT(A) and dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee. Therefore this Tribunal vide order dated 10-02-2023 in to 717/Ahd/2019 set-aside the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to decide the appeals on merits.
4.1. In the present impugned orders passed by Ld. CIT(A), four opportunities of hearing given on 02-12-2024, 30-12-2024, 27-01- 2025 and 18-02-2025. However as it can be seen from Form No. 35, the assessee not sought for email hearing notices but instead of sending physical hearing notices the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeals again for non-prosecution. However looking into the assessment order also for the Asst. Year 2010-11, assessee has not filed the Return of Income. In the next Asst. Year 2011-12, assessee filed the Return of Income and various additional documents were filed before Ld. CIT(A) invoking Rule 46A of the ITAT Rules.
Considering the non-cooperation by the assessee and to meet the ends of justice, we deem it fit to impose cost of Rs.10,000/- each on the quantum appeals and Rs.5,000/- each on the penalty appeals, thereby totaling to Rs.30,000/- payable by the assessee to the Income Tax Department within two weeks of receipt of copy of this order. On production of the same before Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, we direct the JAO to entertain the additional documents filed by the assessee and give one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee and decide the cases on merits and in accordance to 1377/Ahd/2025 A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2011-12 Page No 4 Liz Hemangbhai Bhatt VS. ITO with the provisions of law. Needless to say, assessee should cooperate by furnishing all necessary details before Jurisdictional Assessing Officer.
In the result, all the four appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 02-12-2025