BALKISHAN MOHANLAL GANDHI,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 4(4), NAGPUR
Facts
The assessee challenged a CIT(A) order dated 19/02/2024 for A.Y. 2018-19, which dismissed their appeal for non-prosecution. The assessee claimed they were not afforded an effective opportunity to present their case, having received only two short-notice notices.
Held
The Tribunal found that the assessee was not given an effective opportunity and that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal without passing a speaking order under Section 260(6) of the Act. Consequently, the case was restored to the CIT(A) for re-adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without providing effective opportunity to the assessee and without passing a speaking order under Section 260(6).
Sections Cited
260(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER
ITA no.324/Nag./2025 (Assessment Year : 2018–19) Balkishan Mohanlal Gandhi 131, Ladkar Layout ……………. Appellant Manewada Road, Ayodhya Nagar Nagpur 440 024 PAN – ABYPG4256F v/s Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–4(4), Nagpur Assessee by : Smt. Veena Agrawal Revenue by : Shri Surjit Kumar Saha
Date of Hearing – 23/06/2025 Date of Order – 22/09/2025
O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M.
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 19/02/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”] for the assessment year 2018–19.
It appears that the appellate order has been passed on 19/02/2024, by sending only two notices i.e., one on 02/02/2024 with a deadline fixed on 08/02/2024 and second notice dated 12/02/2024, with
2 Balkishan Mohanlal Gandhi ITA no.324/Nag./2025
a dead line fixed on 16/02/2024. Thus, it is apparent that there was no effective opportunity granted to the assessee to present his case. The learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal for non–prosecution and has not passed a speaking order under section 260(6) of the Act. Accordingly, the case is fit to be restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for re– adjudication. We order accordingly.
In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 22/09/2025
Sd/- Sd/- N.K. CHOUDHRY K.M. ROY JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER NAGPUR, DATED: 22/09/2025 Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Nagpur; and (5) Guard file. True Copy By Order Pradeep J. Chowdhury Sr. Private Secretary Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur
