Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) for AY 2017-18, which was delayed by 101 days. The orders by both the learned CIT(A) and the Assessing Officer were passed ex-parte, with the CIT(A) deciding in limine without adjudicating on the merits of the case.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the 101-day delay in filing the appeal, finding the reasons to be bonafide. It held that the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) without deciding the issues on merit violated Section 250(6) of the Act. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, with a direction to provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
Key Issues
Condonation of delay in filing appeal; Validity of ex-parte order by CIT(A) without merits; Restoration of appeal for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
Section 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “PATNA” BENCH, PATNA
Before: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VP & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 25.09.2024 for the AY 2017-18.
At the outset, we note that the appeal of the assessee is barred by limitation by 101 days. At the time of hearing the counsel of the assessee explained the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. The Ld. D.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the delay is for bonafide and genuine reasons and hence, we condone the delay and adjudicate the appeal.
The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the order was passed ex-parte before the learned CIT (A) as well as before the learned 3.1. The ld. DR on the other hand did not oppose the counsel of the assessee.
3.2. We after hearing the submission of the parties and perusing the material available on record, we find that apparently this appeal was decided ex-parte before the learned CIT (A) as well as before the learned Assessing Officer. We note that despite numerous notices, none presented before the ld. CIT (A) and the ld. CIT (A) passed an ex-parte order in limine without deciding the issues at merit, which in our opinion is in violation of Provisions of Section 250(6) of the Act. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, this appeal is restored to the file of the learned CIT (A) with a direction to decide the same on merit after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. It is further clarified that assessee should also not seek any adjournments unless otherwise required for valid and reasonable cause. The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 28.11.2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (DUVVURU RL REDDY) (RAJESH KUMAR) (VICE PRESIDENT) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Patna, Dated: 28.11.2025 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS Copy of the Order forwarded to:
1. 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT DR, ITAT, 4. 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna