Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) which dismissed the appeal for non-compliance. The AO had passed an ex-parte assessment order, and the CIT(A) also dismissed the appeal without going into the merits, citing non-compliance and lack of representation.
Held
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) has a statutory duty to pass a speaking order on merits, even in the absence of representation. Dismissing the appeal in limine for want of prosecution without considering the merits was erroneous.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal for want of prosecution without considering the merits of the case, and whether a reasonable opportunity of hearing was provided to the assessee.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 144, 144B, 69A, 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “SMC”, LUCKNOW
PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M.: 1. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned appellate order dated 11.11.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as to “the Act”) for the assessment year 2015-16 wherein the assessee’s appeal has been dismissed in limine for the reason of non compliance. The grounds of appeal
of the assessee are as under: -
1. Because on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the order of Ld CIT(A) is bad in law and deserves to be quashed being illegal.
1. 2. Because, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of Ld. CIT is erred in law and on facts in adding an amount of Rs.8,37,000/- under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 being cash deposited out of cash receipts from agricultural income of the assessee which is duly verifiable.
3. Because, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of Ld. CIT is bad in law as the Assessing Officer has made an addition of Rs. 1,00,000/-without considering the reply of the assessee that the assessee has not received any professional income from DLF Limited Page 2 of 4 and it has been wrongly credited in the 26AS of the assessee which is again duly verifiable from the bank statement of the assessee as the assessee does not have any other source of income other that interest income and agricultural income.
Because, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT (A) has passed the order without providing the assessee with a due and proper opportunity of hearing therefore the impugned order deserves to be set-aside being bad in law.
The appellant craves for leave to add, modify, amend or delete any other and further grounds of appeal with permission.” 1.1 In this case, the assessment order dated 15/03/2023 was passed by the Assessing Officer (“AO”), u/s 147 read with section 144 read with section 144B of the Act whereby the assessee’s total income was assessed at Rs.13,14,196/- (Rounded off to Rs.13,14,200/-). The order passed by the Assessing Officer was an exparte order qua the assessee. The assessee’s appeal against the aforesaid assessment order was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) vide impugned appellate order dated 11.11.2024. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the aforesaid impugned appellate order dated 11.11.2024 of the Ld. CIT(A). (2) At the time of hearing, there was no representation from the side of the appellant assessee. In the absence of any representation from the assessee’s side, the Ld. Departmental Representative for Revenue was heard. On perusal of the impugned appellate order dated 11/11/2024 of the Ld. CIT(A), it is found that the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal for want of prosecution, taking adverse view of non-compliance with notices issued by the office of the Ld. CIT(A). However, the Ld. CIT(A) has statutory duty, prescribed u/s 250(6) of the Act to pass a speaking order on the merits of the case, whether or not there was any representation from the assessee’s side. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) in disposing of the assessee’s appeal, is required to be in writing, and the order is further required to contain the Page 3 of 4 point for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for the decisions. Thus, it is the statutory duty of the Ld. CIT(A) to pass a speaking order on merits of the case. It can be readily inferred that dismissing the assessee’s appeal in limine, for want of prosecution, without going into the merits of the case was erroneous on the part of the Ld. CIT(A) having regard to provisions contained under section 250(6) of the Act. Further, the Assessing Officer as well as the Ld. CIT(A) failed to provide reasonable opportunity to the assessee before passing their respective exparte orders. When the facts of the case were discussed with the Ld. Departmental Representative, he submitted that the issues in dispute may be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass denovo order on merits, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. In view of the foregoing, in the specific facts and circumstances of the present case; the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A), dated 11/11/2024 is hereby set aside, and the disputed issued are restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to pass denovo assessment order in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. All grounds of appeal are treated as disposed of in accordance with the aforesaid directions. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 07/03/2025. Sd/- [ANADEE NATH MISSHRA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:07/03/2025 Vijay Pal Singh, (Sr. PS)