BHAVAN RAVAT,RAEBARELI vs. CIT(A), INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 417/LKW/2023Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow22 January 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI KUL BHARAT (Vice President), SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) had a statutory duty to pass a speaking order on merits. Consequently, the CIT(A)'s order was set aside, and the issues were restored to the Assessing Officer for a fresh de novo assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee's income was assessed ex-parte by the Assessing Officer, and the subsequent appeal before the CIT(A) was also dismissed ex-parte. The assessee argued that neither the Assessing Officer nor the CIT(A) provided adequate opportunities or passed speaking orders on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without providing reasonable opportunity and passing a speaking order on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH ‘A’, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma
Hearing: 20/01/2025Pronounced: 22/01/2025

2017-18 against impugned appellate order dated 30/11/2022 ( DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/1047737848(1) passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short].

(B) The facts of the case, in brief, are that in this case assessment order dated 05/12/2019 was passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144 of the I. T.

Act whereby the assessee’s income was assessed at Rs.2,11,92,760/- against the returned income of Rs.48,36,690/-. The order passed by the Assessing Officer was an ex-parte order qua the assessee. Vide impugned appellate order dated 30/11/2022, the assessee’s appeal was dismissed by the learned CIT(A). The order of learned CIT(A) was also passed ex-parte qua the appellant assessee.

(B.1) At the time of hearing, learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer as well as the learned CIT(A), both passed their respective orders without providing reasonable opportunities to the assessee. He further submitted that the learned CIT(A) did not pass speaking order on merits of the various grounds of appeal. In view of these submissions, the learned Counsel for the assessee contended that the issues in dispute should be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer, with the direction to pass fresh assessment order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

(B.2) The learned Departmental Representative for Revenue expressed no objection to aforesaid submissions and contentions of learned Counsel for the assessee. He left the matter to the discretion of the Bench.

(C) We have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. We are of the considered opinion, in view of provisions of section 250(6) of the I. T. Act, that learned CIT(A) had statutory duty to pass speaking order on merits of the various grounds of appeal. In further consideration of the submissions made by the representatives of both sides, the order of learned CIT(A) is set aside and issues in dispute regarding addition made in the assessment order, 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 to the assessee.

(D) In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

(Order pronounced in the open court on 22/01/2025)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →