SRI P.VAITHYALINGAM,TRICHY vs. ITO WARD-1(2), TRICHY

PDF · subscribers
ITA 475/CHNY/2020Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 November 2021AY 2003-044 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT held that the CIT(A) cannot dismiss an appeal for default and must decide on merits, even in the assessee's absence. The dismissal for default by the CIT(A) was deemed bad in law.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed for non-prosecution without a decision on merits. The assessee did not appear before the CIT(A), who concluded the appeal had no merit based on available records.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution without deciding on merits. The validity of an ex-parte order by the CIT(A) without recording findings on the merits of the case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 260

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ (SMC

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH

Hearing: 08.11.2021Pronounced: 08.11.2021

आदेश /O R D E R

1.

This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Trichy, in order dated 26.12.2019. The Assessment was framed by Income Tax Officer, Ward I(2), Trichy for the assessment year 2003-04 vide order dated 30.12.2010 U/s 143(3) r.w.s. 260 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’).

2 2. At the outset, it is noticed that none present for assessee, when the appeal was called for hearing. However, going through the facts, I decided to decide the appeal after hearing ld. senior Department Representative.

3.

I have gone through the grounds raised

by the assessee in regard to two additions of Rs.3,00,000/- of expenditure and Rs.4,00,000/- towards receipt each from assessee’s HUF and his brother’s HUF, added by the AO. The contention of the assessee in grounds of appeal is against ex- parte order passed by CIT(A) without recording any finding on merits. I noticed from the order of CIT(A), para 4 which reads as under:-

4. It appears that assessee has no interest in pursuing appeal filed by him and has nothing to say and he is either unwilling or incapable of furnishing adequate evidence in support of his own claims. On basis of details available from record it could be seen that appeal of assessee has no merit and the same is hence dismissed.”

The CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal simply for non- prosecution. When these facts were confronted to ld. senior Department Representative, he fairly conceded the position and stated that matter can be remanded back to the file of the CIT(A).

3 4. After hearing ld. senior DR and going through the case records as noted above, I’m of the view that the CIT(A) is a quasi judicial authority and in the statute of Income Tax Act, CIT(A) cannot dismiss the appeal for default expressly or by inevitable implication, but the appellate authority has to decide the appeal on merits. The appellate authority has no jurisdiction to dismiss the appeal for default but he is bound to decide the appeal on merits even in the absence of the assessee. Hence, dismissal for default by CIT(A) is bad in law and accordingly, we set aside the order of CIT(A). The appeal is remanded back to the file of CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, after allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We order accordingly.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

More judgments on Section 260

All 82 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →