Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an order of the CIT(A) which dismissed the appeal ex-parte for non-prosecution. The CIT(A) had previously granted five opportunities for hearing, which the assessee failed to utilize by not submitting required documents or seeking adjournments.
Held
The Tribunal found that the appeal was disposed of without adjudicating on the merits. Therefore, to provide justice, the matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication de novo, ensuring the assessee is given a reasonable opportunity to be heard and to submit documents.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without providing sufficient opportunity, and whether the reopening of assessment under Section 147 was valid.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 69A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER Kamleshkumar Jain, Income Tax Officer, Vs. 1, C/o. Hulashchand Jitendra Burad, Ward 1(2)(2), Main Road, Jasol-344024 Ahmedabad Rajasthan [PAN :AALPJ 4526 B] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri M.K. Patel, Advocate Respondent by: Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr Dr Date of Hearing 17.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement 22.09.2025 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:-
Delay condoned.
This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order dated 11.08.2023 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (‘Ld. CIT(A)’ in short), under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ in short), relating to the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds : “
1. That on facts, and in law, the learned NFAC has grievously erred in not granting sufficient and reasonable opportunity to the appellant, and in deciding the appeal ex-parte, for want of prosecution.
2. That on facts, and in law, the learned NFAC ought to have held that the entire re-opening of assessment u/s 147 is bad in law and void ab-initio.
3. That the learned NFAC has grievously erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs.27,55,000/- made u/s 69A of the Act in respect of alleged unexplained credits in Joint Bank Account of appellant and appellant’s wife.” Kamleshkumar Jain Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2012-13 - 2–
3. On going through the record, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has accorded five opportunities of hearing to the assessee. Despite this, the assessee neither filed the requisite submissions/documents nor sought any adjournments. Consequently, the Ld. CIT(A) proceeded to dismiss the appeal in limine. However, considering that the appeal was disposed of without adjudicating on the merits of the grounds raised, and in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication de novo, after affording due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee shall submit all the submission/documents and comply with the notices issued by the authorities without seeking any unnecessary adjournments.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.