MADHYA PRADESH POLICE HOUSING CORPORATION LIMITED,BHOPAL vs. DCIT-2(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Feeling aggrieved by order of first-appeal dated 08.11.2023 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 27.12.2019 passed by learned ACIT-2(1), Bhopal [“AO”] u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2008-09, the assessee has filed this appeal on the grounds mentioned in Appeal Memo (Form No. 36).

The registry has informed that the present appeal is filed on 21.01.2025 against impugned order dated 08.11.2023 after a delay of 356 days. Ld. AR for assessee submitted that the assessee has filed following condonation-application supported by an affidavit:

The assessee is a body of Madhya Pradesh Police. The reasoning given by assessee in above application for occurrence of delay, which is self- explanatory, was discussed and the Ld. DR for revenue left the matter to the wisdom of bench. After taking judicious consideration of submissions made by assessee, we are inclined to condone the delay. Accordingly, we condone delay and decide this appeal on merit.

On merit, the Ld. AR for assessee submitted that the CIT(A) has decided first-appeal ex-parte qua assessee for the reason that the assessee did not make any submission before him despite opportunities given. He further submitted that the CIT(A) has simply confirmed the order passed by AO and thereby upheld the additions but the grounds/issues raised by assessee in first appeal requires an apt adjudication by CIT(A) on merit in accordance with provisions of 250(6) of the Act 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 prays that the present matter should be remanded to CIT(A) for an apt adjudication.

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.

Considering above submissions of parties; having regard to the principle of natural justice and also bearing in mind that no prejudice would be caused to revenue if the present matter is restored at the level of CIT(A), 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 and 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.