BANEESH,MALAPPURAM vs. ITO, WARD 2, TIRUR

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee, an individual, filed his return of income for AY 2020-21 on 16.03.2021 declaring total income of Rs. 11,00,030/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2, Baneesh Tirur (hereafter “the AO”) vide order dated 05.09.2022 passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) at a total income of Rs. 9,30,94,861/- by making an addition of Rs. 9,19,94,831/- on account of differences in respect creditors and liabilities.

Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order dismissed the appeal exparte for non prosecution placing reliance on the judgments of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Chemipol vs. Union of India in Excise Appeal No. 62 of 2009 and a few other orders and the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.N. Bhattacharji and Anr 118 ITR 461 (SC).

Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal.

We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. We find that the learned 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 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 we are of the considered view that the matter requires to be Baneesh 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.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes Order pronounced in the open court on 29th January, 2025.