AMAR SINGH SMARAK SHIKHAN PRASHIKSHAN SANSTHAN,FAIZABAD vs. CPC BANGALORE (ITO-1) , FAIZABAD

ITA 299/LKW/2025Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow17 July 2025AY 2020-213 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering the submissions made by the learned Authorized Representative (A.R.) for the assessee and noting the absence of any objection from the learned D.R., set aside the impugned appellate order dated February 19, 2025. The Tribunal directed the learned CIT(A) to pass a de novo order in accordance with the law after providing a reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The reasoning is based on the assessee's grievance that the CIT(A) did not provide adequate opportunity and failed to pass a speaking order. The ratio decidendi is that an appellate authority must provide a reasonable opportunity of being heard and pass a speaking order on merits. The operative direction is to restore the appeal to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Amar Singh Smarak Shikhan Prashikshan Sansthan, a society registered under the Societies Act, 1860, filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2020-21 on March 31, 2021, declaring total receipts of Rs. 34,52,680/-. The return was processed by the Centralized Processing Centre (CPC), Bengaluru, under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, resulting in a demand of Rs. 11,83,804/- raised by the Revenue. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], who dismissed the appeal. The assessee then filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against the CIT(A)'s order dated February 19, 2025.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in passing an order without affording sufficient time and opportunity to the assessee, thereby violating principles of natural justice, as per the Income Tax Act, 1961? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the learned CIT(A) passed the order without providing sufficient time and opportunity. Furthermore, the assessee contended that the CIT(A) failed to pass a speaking order on merits and dismissed the appeal in a summary manner. Therefore, the assessee requested that the impugned order be set aside and the issue be restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh order after providing a reasonable opportunity. Revenue's Contention: The learned Senior Departmental Representative (D.R.) for the Revenue expressed no objection to the assessee's submissions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH `SMC, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA

For Appellant: Shri Vatsal Kakkar, C.A

2020-21 against impugned appellate order dated 19/02/2025 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2024- 25/1073437297(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short].

(B) The facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a society registered under the Societies Act, 1860. The assessee filed its return of income on 31st March 2021 under section 10(23)(iiiad) of the Act declaring total receipt of Rs.34,52,680/-. The return of the assessee was processed by CPC, Bengaluru and order was passed under section 143(1) of the Act and a demand of Rs.11,83,804/- was created by the Revenue. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the learned CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

(C) Aggrieved further, the assessee has filed the present appeal in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal against the aforesaid impugned appellate order of learned CIT(A). In the course of appellate proceedings in ITAT learned A.R. for the assessee submitted that learned CIT(A) has passed order without affording sufficient time and opportunity to the assessee. The learned AR for the assessee further submitted that the learned CIT(A) failed to pass a speaking order on merits and dismissed the assessee’s appeal in a summary manner. In view of the foregoing, learned AR for the assessee submitted, the impugned order of learned CIT(A) should be set aside and the issue in dispute should be restored to the file of learned CIT(A) with the direction to pass fresh order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The learned Sr. D.R. for the Revenue expressed no objection.

(D) Both sides have been heard. Materials on record have been perused. In view of the submissions made by the Learned A. R. for the assessee, and there being no objection from learned D.R., we set aside the impugned appellate order dated 19/02/2025 to the file of learned CIT(A) and we direct the learned CIT(A) to pass de novo order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

(E) In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes.

(Order pronounced in the open court on 17/07/2025)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →