Loading judgment…
Facts
The Assessing Officer passed an ex-parte assessment order under Sections 144, 147, and 144B, making an addition of Rs.33,43,33,750/- under Sections 69A and 115BBE. The CIT(A) confirmed the main addition, leading the assessee to file an appeal before the ITAT with a delay of 691 days.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Observing that both lower authorities passed ex-parte orders without adequate opportunity to the assessee, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the matter to the AO for a de novo assessment on merits, ensuring proper opportunity is given to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte assessment by the AO and subsequent confirmation by CIT(A) were valid given the alleged denial of proper opportunity to the assessee, and whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.
Sections Cited
144, 147, 144B, 69A, 115BBE
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH - DB
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM & SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM
Assessee by: Mr.Richard Mathews, C.A, Revenue by: Mr.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT DR Date of Hearing: 06.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 25.11.2025 O R D E R
PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM:
The captioned appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)/NFAC, Delhi [‘CIT(A)’ in short] dated 27.09.2023 for Assessment Year 2017-18.
At the outset the registry has noted delay of 691 days delay in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. We have gone through the condonation petition and find the reasons as ‘sufficient cause’ hence condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer (A.O.) passed ex-order u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 r.w.s 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) dated 30.03.2022 by making an addition of Rs.33,43,33,750/- u/s.69A r.w.s.115BBE of the Act. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A).
However, the learned CIT(A) confirmed the main addition however, partly allowed the appeal.
Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before us.
Before us, the Ld. AR for assessee read out para 4 and 5 of the impugned order wherein in a chart of notices issued and compliance received are shown before both authorities below. He further submitted that both authorities passed orders in haste and adequate opportunity has not been provided. He has referred three email id’s which were sometimes bounced and sometimes delivered. The Ld. D.R relied upon the order of the ld. CIT(A) and pleaded for the dismissal of the appeal.
Though we some extent concur with the submissions of Ld. DR, however, keeping in mind the natural justice, we are of the view that the assessee may be granted opportunity to file submissions and evidence, if any before the AO. Having perused both charts, we are of the considered view that the notices issued/sent through three email id’s, sometimes show mail delivered and sometimes bounced which is contrary. Since, both proceedings are virtually ex-parte, therefore, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to the appeal file to the AO for de novo assessment on merit as per law. The AO shall proceed for hearing the de novo assessment on merits after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to substantiate its case with all evidence and documents, if any, forthwith without any fail, failing which AO shall be at liberty to proceed with the de novo assessment proceedings on merits as per law. The Ld. AR of the assessee also assured us that the assessee will prosecute the case diligently before the authorities below.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 25th November, 2025 at Cochin.