Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a charitable trust, filed a nil income return claiming exemption under Section 11. The CPC denied the exemption under Section 143(1) due to the non-filing of Form 10BB. The CIT(A) subsequently dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte for non-prosecution.
Held
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred by dismissing the appeal in limine ex-parte without deciding it on merits, which is contrary to the requirement under Section 250(6) of the Act. The matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on merits after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal ex-parte for non-prosecution without disposing of it on merits, in contravention of Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Sections Cited
11, 143(1), 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ADDL/JCIT (A), Mysore [CIT(A)] dated 14.03.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2023-24. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a charitable trust. Return of income for AY 2023-24 was filed on 29/11/2023 disclosing nil income after claiming exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. The said return of income was processed by the CPC u/s. 143(1)
Meat Products of India Ltd. Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') vide intimation dated 04/12/2024 denying the exemption u/s. 11 on the ground that Form 10BB was not filed.
Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order dismissed the appeal exparte for non prosecution.
Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal.
I find that the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine for non prosecution. As contemplated u/s. 250(6) of the Act the CIT(A) is required to frame points of determination followed by a detailed discussion thereupon before passing the order. It is the settled position of law that the CIT(A), even while disposing of the appeal exparte, is duty bound to dispose of the appeal on merits. Reliance in this regard can be placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (279 CTR 614). Therefore, in the light of the above legal position I am of the considered view that the matter requires to be remanded to the file of the CIT(A) with the direction to dispose of the appeal de novo on merits after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.