Loading judgment…
Facts
The Assessing Officer made an ad-hoc addition of Rs. 30,00,000 to the assessee's business income during assessment under Section 143(3). The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte for alleged non-compliance with notices, without deciding the case on its merits.
Held
The ITAT observed that the Ld. CIT(A) had not adjudicated the appeal on merits and that no email ID for sending notices was mentioned in the order. Consequently, the ITAT set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication on merits, ensuring the assessee is provided a proper opportunity of hearing.
Key Issues
Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without adjudicating on merits, and whether the ad-hoc addition made by the AO was proper.
Sections Cited
143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Visakhapatnam Bench, Visakhapatnam
Before: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Balakrishnan S.
(निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2017-18) BVN Modular Vs. Dy.Commissioner of Designers(P.)Ltd. Income Tax Rajahmundry Circle-2 Rajamahendravaram [PAN : AAFCB3325H] (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Shri GVN Hari, AR (through Hybrid hearing) रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date of Hearing: 30/04/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date of 30/04/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / ORDER PER. VIJAY PAL RAO, VICE PRESIDENT : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 09.01.2025 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“Ld.CIT(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre, Gwalior for the assessment year 2017-18.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : 1) The order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) is contrary to the facts and also the law applicable to the facts of the case . 2) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte. 3) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have directed the assessing officer to delete the addition of Rs.30,00,000 made towards business income. 4) Any other ground that may be urged at the time of appeal hearing.
The learned AR of the assessee has submitted that the Assessing Officer (“the AO”) has made adhoc addition of Rs.30,00,000/- while framing the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”). The Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee while passing the ex-parte order on the ground that the assessee has not complied with the notices issued by the Ld.CIT(A). He has submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated the appeal of the assessee on merits, but the same was dismissed for non-prosecution. Hence, he has pleaded that the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) should be set aside and the matter may be remanded to the record of the Ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits after giving appropriate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
On the other hand, the Ld.DR has raised no objection if the matter is remanded to the record of the Ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
We have considered the rival submissions and carefully perused the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) has issued three notices from 18.10.2024 to 19.12.2024, allegedly sent to e-mail, but no e-mail ID is mentioned in the order. Further, the Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non prosecution / non compliance on the part of the assessee and therefore, the appeal of the assessee was not decided on merits. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case, we set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and the matter is remanded to the record of the Ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits by a speaking order after giving appropriate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on conclusion of hearing on 30th April, 2025.