Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: MS. SUCHITRA R. KAMBLE & SHRI B.M. BIYANI
आदेश/ O R D E R
Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:
Feeling aggrieved by order of first-appeal dated 30.03.2025 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 20.12.2017 passed by learned ITO-5(4), Indore [“AO”] u/s 143(3) of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2015-16, the assessee has filed this appeal on the grounds mentioned in Appeal Memo (Form No. 36).
This is the 2nd round of appeal before ITAT. The background facts 2. leading to present appeal are as under:
(i) The assessee-individual filed his return of AY 2015-16 u/s 139 declaring a total income of Rs. 5,24,790/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and the AO issued notices u/s 143(2)/142(1). Finally, the AO completed assessment vide order dated 20.12.2017 u/s 143(3) after making an addition of Rs. 1,23,03,420/- u/s 68 by disallowing exempted long-term capital gain u/s 10(38) claimed to have been earned by assessee from transactions of shares and thereby assessing total income at Rs. 1,28,28,210/-. Aggrieved, the assessee carried matter in first-appeal before CIT(A) but did not get any relief. The assessee carried matter in next appeal to ITAT, Indore bench in ITA No.
487/Ind/2019 wherein the ITAT, vide order dated 11/12/2019, remanded matter to CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication. The 1st round ended here.
(ii) Pursuant to ITAT’s order, the CIT(A) resumed proceedings and posted assessee’s first-appeal for hearings but finding no response from assessee, the CIT(A) again dismissed assessee’s first-appeal vide impugned order dated 30.03.2025. Now, the assessee has again approached ITAT assailing the impugned order passed by CIT(A). Accordingly, this is 2nd round before ITAT.
At first, we re-produce the impugned order passed by CIT(A):
Thus, the CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s appeal by citing the reason of non-response of assessee as well as mentioning that the Form No. 35, Ground of Appeal, Statement of Facts, Copy of order appealed against, demand notice, etc. were not available to him or not uploaded by assessee.
However, we find that the proceedings of fresh adjudication, pursuant to ITAT’s order, have been conducted under Faceless regime whereas the Page 4 of 6 proceeding of first-appeal were originally conducted in Physical regime.
Therefore, there may be a communication gap due to transition from Physical regime to Faceless regime due to which the documents might have not been available to CIT(A). Further, the CIT(A) has fixed hearings of fresh adjudication on 03.03.2025, 19.03.2025 & 31.03.2025 within a very short span of time. Therefore, the case of assessee requires revisiting by CIT(A) and passing a meritorious order in accordance with the mandatory provision of section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 which provides “The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision.”. Ld. AR acknowledges that the assessee is ready and willing to make a proper representation before CIT(A) if an opportunity is given and hence prays that the present matter should be remanded to CIT(A) for an apt adjudication in terms of section 250(6).
Ld. DR for revenue agrees with the prayer of Ld. AR but makes a request to direct the assessee to represent his case before CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments.
In view of facts and submissions of parties as noted above and also having regard to the principle of natural justice and fair play, we remand this matter back to the file of CIT(A) for adjudication afresh. The CIT(A) shall give necessary opportunity of hearing to assessee and pass an appropriate order uninfluenced by his earlier order. The assessee is also directed to remain vigilant; submit Form No. 35, Grounds of Appeal, Statement of Facts
Page 5 of 6 and any other document required by CIT(A) and also ensure participation in the hearings as may be fixed by CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments failing which the CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly.
Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced by putting up on notice board as per Rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 on 16/12/2025