Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to non-compliance. The assessee argued that their written submissions were not considered, and requested another opportunity. The original assessment order included an addition of ₹1,17,59,338/- by disallowing a claim under section 54 of the Act.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A)'s order was ex-parte as the assessee failed to appear multiple times. Considering the prayer for one more opportunity and the nature of the business, the Tribunal decided to set aside the impugned order and afford the assessee a chance to present their case before the CIT(A).
Key Issues
Whether the assessee should be granted a further opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A) when the previous appeal was dismissed due to non-compliance and ex-parte proceedings.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 144B, 54
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH :: NAGPUR
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi, dated 28/02/2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”) which is arising out of assessment order passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, dated 31.03.2022 for the Assessment Year 2016-17.
(Sunil Shatrughan Mishra) 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that due to non-compliance before the Ld.CIT(A), appeal of the assessee has been dismissed. However, he submitted that he has filed written submissions, which were not considered by the Ld. CIT(A) by stating that uploaded response was 0KB. Prayer is made to afford one more opportunity to go before the Ld. CIT(A). Ld. DR did not raise any objection to the innocuous prayer made by the learned counsel for the assessee.
We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. Considering the prayer of the learned counsel for the assessee and also observing that the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) is an exparte as the assessee failed to appear on the dates fixed for hearing on four occasions. We also observe that assessee is proprietorship engaged in the business of sale of metal, and the assessment for A.Y.2016-17 completed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act and addition of ₹ 1,17,59,338/- has been made by disallowing claim u/s. 54 of the Act as the assessee was having another residential house. Therefore, we deem it appropriate to afford one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case before the Ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudication and to pass a speaking order as 2 (Sunil Shatrughan Mishra) contemplated u/s. 250(6) of the Act. Needless to mention that before passing the order, Ld.CIT(A) shall grant fair opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take any adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable cause and file all the details called for by the Ld.CIT(A). Thus, the impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 4. In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open Court on 24.02.2026 at the time of hearing
Sd/- sd/- PAWAN SINGH KHETTRA MOHAN ROY JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Nagpur: Dated: 24/02/2026 vr/-
The Assessee 2. The Revenue 3. The Pr.CIT concerned. 4. The DR, ITAT, Nagpur 5. Guard file. By order
Senior Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur