Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the assessment order which was passed ex-parte. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal without providing a reasonable opportunity, partly due to the assessee's medical condition (Tuberculosis and physical isolation). The CIT(A) also provided a very short compliance window.
Held
The Tribunal held that both the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) failed to provide reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, the appellate order was set aside and the case was restored to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee was denied a reasonable opportunity of being heard by the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A)?
Sections Cited
250, 143(3), 144B, 68, 69A, 40A(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH ‘SMC’, LUCKNOW
Before: SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA
2020-21 against impugned appellate order dated 08/03/2025 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1074219266(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. Grounds of appeal are as under:
“1. Because the appellate order passed by the Ld. CIT (A) u/s 250 of the Act is contrary to facts, law and circumstances of the case and also against the principles of natural justice. The appellate order passed by CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi is liable to be set-aside.
Because the Ld CIT (A) has erred in dismissing the appeal of the appellant by not allowing condonation of delay in filing of the appeal under the most adverse circumstances beyond the control of the appellant. The appellate order is liable to be set- aside.
Because the addition of Rs.29,61,670/- mad e by the Assessing Officer is contrary to law, facts and circumstances of the case and dismissal of appeal by the Ld. CIT (A) on technical grounds would cause irreparable loss to the appellant. The appellate order passed by the Ld. CIT (A) is against the principles of natural justice and liable to be deleted.
Because the addition of Rs.1,55,024/- on account of application fees, addition of Rs.17,99,800/- u/s 68 being total cash credit from three parties Rock Heights, Kanchan Bhaiya & Manoj Kumar, addition of Rs.9,00,000/- u/s 69A towards payment to Sri Anil Kumar Modi in Federal Bank A/c and addition of Rs.99,000/- under the provisions of section 40A(3) made in the assessment order and not addressed by the Ld. CIT (A) are contrary to law, facts and circumstances of the case.”
(B) The facts of the case, in brief, are that in this case assessment order dated 10/09/2022 was passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) read with section 144B the I. T. Act whereby the assessee’s total income was assessed at Rs.30,34,154/- (rounded off to Rs.30,34,150/-) as against returned income of Rs.72,480/-. In the aforesaid assessment order, various additions amounting to Rs.29,61,670/- were made under various heads. The order passed by the Assessing Officer was an ex-parte order qua the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A). During appellate proceedings, learned CIT(A) provided (just) one opportunity vide notice dated 25/02/2025, whereby compliance date was prescribed as 03/03/2025 barely a few days after issue of notice. Vide impugned appellate order dated 08/03/2025, the assessee’s appeal was dismissed by the learned CIT(A).
(C) Both sides have been heard. Materials on record have been perused. Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer has framed the assessment order ex-parte without providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. He further submitted that the learned CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal without providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. He also submitted that the assessee was a patient of Tuberculosis, and was observing physical isolation, during medical treatment; due to which it was not feasible to avail of the limited opportunity provided by learned CIT(A). In view of the foregoing submissions, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the issues in dispute in the present appeal before the Tribunal, should be restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer to pass de novo order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The learned Departmental Representative for Revenue expressed no objection to this. After hearing both sides, the impugned appellate order of the learned CIT(A) is hereby set aside and issues in dispute are restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass de novo assessment order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. (D) In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
(Order pronounced in the open court on 07/10/2025)