Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a partnership firm, filed its return for AY 2017-18, declaring an income of Rs.1,61,640. The AO completed the assessment at Rs.4,42,821, adding Rs.2,81,181 due to the application of ICDS as the assessee failed to provide an explanation. The CIT(A) subsequently dismissed the assessee's appeal ex parte for non-prosecution.
Held
The Tribunal, relying on a Bombay High Court decision, held that the CIT(A) is duty-bound to dispose of an appeal on merits even if it is dismissed ex parte for non-prosecution. Accordingly, the case was remanded to the CIT(A) for a fresh disposal on merits, with a direction to provide the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal ex parte for non-prosecution without deciding on merits, or if they are obligated to decide on merits even in the absence of the appellant.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, COCHIN
Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao
Asst.Year 2017-2018 M/s.Tata Automobiles The Income Tax Officer Kuruppam Road v. Ward 2(5) Thrissur. Thrissur. PAN : AABFT3233B. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : --- None--- Respondent by : Smt.Leena Lal, Senior AR Date of Date of Hearing : 04.02.2025 Pronouncement : 11.02.2025 O R D E R This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Assessment Centre / Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short] dated 17.09.2024 having DIN & Order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1068740444(1) for the assessment year 2017-2018.
Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in trading of automobile spare parts and components, filed return of income for the assessment year 2017-2018 declaring total income of Rs.1,61,640. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and the assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer (“the AO" hereinafter) at a total income of Rs.4,42,821, after making an addition of Rs.2,81,181 on account of reduction in profit due to
Being aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order dismissed the appeal ex parte for non prosecution placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s.Chemipol v. Union of India in Excise Appeal No.62 of 2009 and a few other judgments.
Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal. When the matter was called upon, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite due service of notice. Therefore, I proceed to dispose of this appeal on merits, after hearing the learned Sr.DR.
I have heard the learned Sr.DR and perused the material available on record. I find that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine for non prosecution. It is the settled position of law that the CIT(A), even while disposing of the appeal ex parte, 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 v. 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 being heard to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.