Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed against an ex-parte order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption) for Assessment Year 2025-26. The assessee's counsel requested that the matter be restored to the CIT(E) for a fresh decision on merits, a request not opposed by the Departmental Representative.
Held
The Tribunal found that the CIT(E) passed an ex-parte order without deciding the issues on merit, violating Section 250(6) of the Act. Consequently, the appeal is restored to the file of the CIT(E) with a direction to decide the matter on merit after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee, with the clarification that the assessee should not seek undue adjournments.
Key Issues
Whether an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(E) without deciding on the merits and in violation of Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act is valid, and if the case should be restored 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
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “PATNA” BENCH, PATNA BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VP AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM & 377/PAT/2025 (Assessment Years: 2025-26) Kayakalp Foundation CIT (Exemption) Geeta Aum Sadan, S.P. Bariyar 2nd Floor, C.R. Building, Path, Block A, Postal Park, Road Birchand Patel Path, Vs. No.1, Patna-800001, Bihar Patha-800001, Bihar (Respondent) (Appellant) PAN No. AAETK5914F Assessee by : Shri Rakesh Kumar, AR Revenue by : Shri Md. AH Chowdhary, DR Date of hearing: 26.11.2025 Date of pronouncement: 28.11.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:
These are appeals preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption)(hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(E)”] dated 20.06.2025 for the AY 2025-26.
The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the order was passed ex-parte before the learned CIT (E). The ld. Counsel for the assessee therefore prayed that the issue may kindly be restored to the file of the ld. CIT (A), so that issue could be decided on merit afresh.
2.1. The ld. DR on the other hand did not oppose the counsel of the assessee.
2.2. We after hearing the submission of the parties and perusing the material available on record, we find that apparently these appeals were decided ex-parte before the learned CIT (E). We note that despite numerous notices, none represented before the ld. CIT (E)
In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 28.11.2025.