RUBY DEVI,BETTIAH vs. ITO WARD 1(5), BETTIAH
Facts
The assessee filed appeals against the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre for AYs 2015-16 & 2016-17. There was a 58-day delay in filing the appeals, which the Tribunal condoned for genuine and sufficient reasons. The Tribunal noted that there was partial compliance before the AO but no compliance before the CIT(A), and the CIT(A) failed to decide the appeals on merits, violating Section 250(6) of the Act.
Held
The Tribunal restored all appeals to the file of the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh adjudication on merits, directing the AO to provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee was concurrently directed to ensure necessary compliance before the AO to facilitate a seamless decision-making process.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred by not deciding the appeals on merits as required by Section 250(6) of the Act, and whether the assessee's non-compliance warranted a remand for fresh adjudication by the AO.
Sections Cited
Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, `PATNA BENCH, PATNA
Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘PATNA’ BENCH, PATNA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM
ITA Nos. 91, 92,93 & 94/PAT/2025 (Assessment Year:2015-16 & 2016-17) Ruby Devi ITO Ward 1(5) Mahabir Electric Mohalla Vs. Lalbazar, Bihar-845438 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. CAVPD1148P Assessee by : Shri Monark Jain, AR Revenue by : Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, DR Date of hearing: 07.07.2025 Date of pronouncement: 18.07.2025
O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:
These are appeals preferred by the assessee against the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 28.10.2024, 29.10.2024 for the AYs 2015- 16 & 2016-17.
At the outset, we observe that there is a delay of 58 days in filing all the appeals by the assessee for which the condonation petitions were filed. After hearing both the sides and after going through the contents of the condonation petition, we are of the opinion that the delay is for genuine and sufficient reasons and accordingly, condoned and appeals are admitted for adjudication.
After hearing both the sides and after perusing the facts on record including the appellate orders as well as the assessment orders, we
In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 18.07.2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY) (RAJESH KUMAR) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Kolkata, Dated:18.07.2025 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS
Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna
