PSN EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,NAGERCOIL vs. ITO, NAGERCOIL

The assessee carried the matter in appeal before CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal ex-parte and the matter went to Tribunal in vide order dated 27.03.2015, wherein, the order of CIT(A) was set aside and the matter was remanded back to his file. Consequently the appeal was referred back to CIT(A), who in this appeal i.e., the impugned order again dismissed the appeal ex-parte but by not adjudicating the issues at all, he dismissed the appeal for default i.e., non-appearance of assessee or its authorized representative. Aggrieved the assessee filed this appeal before Tribunal. Before Tribunal, the assessee has preferred many grounds.

At the outset, it is noticed that the order of CIT(A) is dismissing the appeal of assessee for default i.e., for non- appearance by assessee or its authorized representative. The ld.counsel as well as ld.senior Departmental Representative fairly conceded that this is an ex-parte order and appeal dismissed for default on the part of the assessee. There is no discussion on merits in this order. Can CIT(A) dismiss the appeal for default on the part of the assessee and not adjudicate any of the issue

We are of the view that unless the statute authorizes quasi judicial authority to dismiss the appeal for default expressly or by inevitable implication, the appellate authority has to decide the appeal on merits and not to dismiss it for default. The appellate authority has no jurisdiction to dismiss the appeal for default and he is bound to decide the appeal on merits even in the absence of the assessee. Hence, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore the matter back to his file for deciding the issues on merits, in case the assessee does not appear. Needless to say that CIT(A) will allow reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.