Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2018-19 was dismissed for want of prosecution. The AO had passed ex-parte orders after the assessee failed to reply to a notice under Section 148.
Held
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) did not adjudicate the appeal on merit and dismissed it for want of prosecution, which is contrary to Section 250(6). The penalty for negligence was disproportionate, and hence, a fresh opportunity was granted.
Key Issues
Whether the dismissal of appeal by CIT(A) for want of prosecution without adjudicating on merit is justified, and whether a fresh opportunity for assessment should be granted.
Sections Cited
148, 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL
O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, VP The assessee is in appeal against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 31.01.2024 passed for assessment year 2018-19. 2. The assessee has taken seven grounds of appeal while impugning the order of the ld. CIT(A). However, first fold of grievance of the assessee is that both the authorities have A.Y.2018-19 2 passed ex-parte orders against the assessee without providing due opportunity of hearing.
With the assistance of ld. Representative, we have gone through the record carefully. We find that AO made reference to the information available with the Department on the basis of internal data vide which assessee's transactions during the year have been reflected in the bank accounts as well as sale/purchase of properties. The AO has issued notice under Section 148 but it was not replied by the assessee. Ultimately, he has passed the ex- parte assessment order.
Dissatisfied with the above, assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A) but the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed for want of prosecution. Sub- section (6) of Section 250 contemplates that ld. CIT(A) would state the points in dispute and thereafter record reasons in support of the conclusion on those points. The ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the appeal on merit, rather dismissed it for want of prosecution which is not in coherence to the mandate provided under sub-section (6) of A.Y.2018-19 3 Section 250 of the Act. No doubt assessee was little bit negligent while prosecuting his litigation with the Income Tax Department but the punishment in the shape of tax liability on the income of Rs.2,18,68,857/- is far disproportionate to the alleged negligence. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to grant one more opportunity to the assessee. We set aside both the impugned orders and restore all these issues to the file of AO for fresh adjudication. The assessee is directed to participate the assessment proceedings and submit the requisite details as and when called upon by the AO. The assessee is further directed to communicate his latest e-mail address as well as address on which notices can be served. This exercise be completed within two months from the receipt of this order.
In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.