Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) for AY 2016-17, arguing that both the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) had decided the matter ex-parte without considering the merits. The assessee sought to have the case restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.
Held
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order, passed without deciding the issues on merit despite issuing notices, violated Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, the Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(A) with a direction to decide the matter afresh on merits after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee, and cautioned the assessee against seeking unnecessary adjournments.
Key Issues
Whether an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) without deciding the issues on merit violates Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, and if the case should be remanded back for de novo adjudication.
Sections Cited
Section 250(6) of the Act
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 Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) Patna-3 (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 31.07.2025 for the AY 2016-17.
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 Assessing Officer. 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 this appeal was
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 28.11.2025.