KUNJEEDU PUKLA SERY,MALAPPURAM vs. ITO, WARD 1 TPS, TIRUR, TIRUR

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income for AY 2017-18 on 03.03,2018 declaring total income of Rs. 22,38,520/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward -2, Tirur (hereafter Kunjeedu Puklasery “the AO”) completed the assessment vide order dated 23.09.2021 passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) at a total income of Rs. 1,60,38,520/- by making an addition of Rs. 1,38,00,000/- as concealed income u/s. 69A r.w.s. 1145BBE of the Act.

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.

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 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.