Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee is in appeal against the order of CIT(A) which upheld the assessment order passed u/s 144/147. The original assessment order was passed ex-parte due to non-representation, and the assessee failed to file a rejoinder to the remand report before the CIT(A).
Held
The Tribunal found that neither the AO nor the CIT(A) had disposed of the case on merits. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the case back to the AO for a fresh assessment on merits, considering all evidence.
Key Issues
Whether the lower authorities properly adjudicated the case on merits when the assessment was initially passed ex-parte and the assessee failed to file a rejoinder to the remand report. The need for a fresh assessment on merits.
Sections Cited
253, 144, 147, 246A, 54F, 144/147
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI B.M. BIYANI & SHRI PARESH M JOSHI
आदेश / O R D E R
Per Paresh M Joshi, J.M.:
This is an appeal filed by the assessee Under Section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act” for sake of brevity) before this Tribunal. The assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1067943825(1) dated 24.08.2024 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) which is hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned order”. The Page 1 of 6 previous year period is from 01.04.2010 to 31.03.2011.
FACTUAL MATRIX 2.1 That as and by way of an assessment order made u/s. 144/147 of the Act, the assesee’s total income exigible to tax was computed and assessed at Rs.29,61,750/-. The assessee has not filed his return of income. That the aforesaid assessment order is dated 13.12.2018 which is hereinafter referred to as the “impugned assessment order”.
2.2 That the assessee being aggrieved by the aforesaid “impugned assessment order” prefers first appeal u/s 246A of the Act before the Ld. CIT(A) who by the “impugned order” has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the grounds and reasons stated therein. The core ground was that a remand report was called for and that the same was forwarded to the assessee for filing rejoinder. Even after three opportunities the assessee did not file any rejoinder. No documentary evidence was produced towards cost of acquisition and cost of construction. The genuineness of the claim of exemption u/s 54F was not proved either before Ld. A.O as well before 1st appellate authority and Page 2 of 6 dismissed.
2.3 That the assessee being aggrieved by the “impugned order” has preferred the instant second appeal before this Tribunal and has raised following grounds of appeal in Form No.36 against the “impugned order” which are as under:-
“1. The Ld CIT(A) has erred in making confirmation of the addition made by learned Assessing Officer of receipts of sale of immovable property Rs.2961750/- under LTCG.”
Record of Hearing 3.1 The hearing in the matter took place before this Tribunal on 25.06.2025 when the Ld. AR for and on behalf of the assessee filed on the record of this Tribunal a paper book containing pages 1 to 26. It was contended by him that the “impugned assessment order” was passed u/s 144 of the Act, due to non representation.
Before Ld. CIT(A) in the first appeal representations and submissions were made and a remand report was sought by Ld. CIT(A) from the Ld. A.O however it is stated in the “impugned order” that no rejoinder was filed by the assessee. Per contra Ld. DR appearing for and on behalf of the revenue has contended that in view of “impugned assessment order” being u/s 144 of Page 3 of 6 Ld. A.O for passing a fresh assessment order on denovo basis.
Observations,findings & conclusions.
4.1 We now have to decide the legality, validity and the proprietery of the “impugned order” basis records of the case and rival contentions canvassed before us.
4.2 We have carefully perused the records of the case as presented to this Tribunal by both Ld. AR & Ld. DR to determine the legality, validity of the “impugned order” basis law and by following due process .
4.3 We observe on bare simple perusal of the “impugned order” that the Ld. CIT(A) has held that since no rejoinder is filed by the assessee to the remand report of Ld. A.O despite opportunities so due to lack of evidence the “impugned assessment order” is upheld of the Ld. A.O. We notice and observe that on page 11 of paper book which is a letter dated 12.02.2024 to the Ld. CIT(A) there is a reference to a remand
Page 4 of 6 documents are already on record vide their earlier letter dated 18.02.2021 (Page 1 to 6 of paper book). Be that as it may we are of the considered view that lower authorities i.e. the Ld. A.O & Ld. CIT(A) both have not disposed off the case on meritorious grounds. The income of the assessee is required to be computed and assessed on merits. Unfortunately this has not happened.
Accordingly we set aside the “impugned order” and remand the case back to the file of Ld. A.O to pass a fresh order on denovo basis by taking into consideration entire gamut of case including material and evidences submitted by the assessee. We accordingly direct assessee to place all documents, material in his possession and disposal to the Ld. A.O so that same can be weighed and appreciated in fresh proceedings on denovo bais.
Order 5.1 In the premises drawn up by us we set aside the “impugned order” as and by way of remand back to Ld. A.O for fresh adjudication and adjudgment accordingly to law on denovo basis.
Page 5 of 6 purpose.
Order pronounced in open court on 30.06.2025.