Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, an AOP, filed its return of income declaring Rs. NIL. The Assessing Officer, due to non-response from the assessee, made additions and determined the total income at Rs. 11,78,216. The CIT(A) upheld this order without deciding on merits.
Held
The Tribunal observed that both the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) passed ex-parte orders without deciding the issues on merits. The CIT(A) failed to pass a speaking order as required by section 250(6) of the Act.
Key Issues
Whether the lower authorities have passed orders without deciding the issues on merits and whether the CIT(A) failed to provide a speaking order.
Sections Cited
143(2), 142(1), 144, 143(3A), 143(3B), 250, 43B, 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH : NAGPUR
Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO
ORDER PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M. : This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 26.09.2024, of the learned CIT(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, relating to assessment year 2018-2019. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee is an AOP and filed it’s return of income on 31.10.2018, declaring total income. At Rs.NIL. The case of the 2 ITA.No.597/NAG./2024 assessee has been selected for scrutiny under CASS having issues “Investment/Advances/Loans and Business Expenses”. The Assessing Officer issued statutory notices u/sec.143(2) and 142(1) of the Act. Since, there were no response from the side of the assessee, the Assessing Officer issued show cause notice u/sec.144 of the Act calling for explanation of the assessee. The assessee did not file any reply to the said show cause notice. Therefore, the Assessing Officer determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.11,78,216/- vide order dated 24.02.2021 u/sec.144 r.w.s.143(3A) and 143(3B) of the Act.
On being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A) issued several notices u/sec.250 of the Act to furnish information/documents as called for. In absence of any reply from the side of the assessee, the learned CIT(A) sustained the total income of Rs.11,78,216/- determined by the Assessing Officer.
Aggrieved by the order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
3 ITA.No.597/NAG./2024
During the course of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. I, therefore, proceed to decide the appeal on merits, after hearing the Learned DR.
I find that the assessee society did not appear before the lower authorities despite providing opportunity and, therefore, the Assessing Officer determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.11,78,216/- which has been sustained by the learned CIT(A). I find that the Assessing Officer determined the total income of the assessee in absence of return of income by making additions on account of income from others, disallowance of commission expenses, disallowance of other expenses and disallowance of unpaid liability u/sec.43B of the Act. I find that the assessee is an AOP registered under the Law in Maharashtra engaged in providing credit facilities to it’s members. From the perusal of the order of the learned CIT(A), I find that the learned CIT(A) has simply confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer without deciding the issues on merits as contemplated u/sec.250(6) of the Act even the assessee did not appear before him. According to sec.250(6) of the Act, the learned 4 ITA.No.597/NAG./2024