Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was dismissed in limine by the CIT(A)/NFAC due to non-appearance, despite the assessee having raised grounds of appeal concerning the dismissal notice service and seeking adjudication on merits. The assessee contended that notices were not properly served and sought restoration of the appeal.
Held
The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's desire to pursue the case on merits and the potential violation of natural justice. Considering the assessee had already incurred costs and the substantial rights involved, the Tribunal decided to restore the appeal to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in limine without adjudicating on merits, and if proper procedure was followed for serving hearing notices.
Sections Cited
254(1), 144, 250, 69A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER;
This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of ld.
CIT(A)/NFAC dated 17.04.2024 for Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:
“1. That on the facts & circumstances of the case Learned CIT(A) erred in summarily dismissing the appeal in limine for non appearance before him, And Without going in the merits of case.
2. The notice of hearing of appeal is served only on the income tax login. And failed to serve notice on register email id or registered office of the appellant.
3. That this Hon Tribunal give direction to restore back the appeal to CIT(A) & adjudicate the same on merits.
4. That this Hon Tribunal may grant any other relief as may deem fit in the interest of justice.”
Rival submissions of both the parties have been heard and record perused. The ld. Authorized Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee
ITA 7032/Mum/2025 (AY 2019-20) Neelam Ayurchem India Pvt. Ltd. submits that ld. CIT(A) passed ex-parte order without adjudicating various grounds of appeal. The ld. CIT(A) in para 6 of his order recorded that 4 notices were issued to the assessee and that assessee has made no response. The ld. CIT(A) has not issued the notice on the e-mail provided on Form – 35, rather notice may have been issued on the e- mail which may be available in the record of Income Tax Department / ITBA portal. The assessee has now updated his e-mail. The assessee is interested in pursuing his case on merit, therefore, matter may be restored back to the file of ld. CIT(A) with the direction to adjudicate of the appeals on merit. He undertakes on behalf of the assessee to be more vigilant and make timely compliance.
On the other hand, learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr.
DR) for the Revenue submits that assessee is habitual defaulter in not making timely compliance. The assessment was also completed under section 144. Further, there was delay in filing the appeal before ld. CIT(A), the ld. CIT(A) graciously allowed the delay. Since no compliance was made in response to notice under section 250, therefore, the ld. CIT(A) has not option except to dismiss the appeal in absence of any submission.
We have considered the rival submissions of both the parties and have gone through the lower authorities carefully. We find that assessment was completed under section 144. The assessing officer made addition of Rs. 2.40 crore under section 69A as unexplained money. The assessee was treated as beneficiary of fictitious transaction from MKRS
ITA 7032/Mum/2025 (AY 2019-20) Neelam Ayurchem India Pvt. Ltd.
Garments Pvt. Ltd. The ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order of ex-parte order. Considering the fact that assessee is interested in pursuing his case on merit and substantial rights of the assessee are involved in the present appeal. The assessee has already suffered the cost of appeal fee and litigation fees for filing appeal before this Tribunal. Therefore, keeping in view the principle of natural justice, the matter is restored back to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide the issues on merit. The ld. CIT(A) may be at liberty to call the remand report from assessing officer, in case fresh evidence is filed before him, which may require verification from the end of assessing officer. The assessee is also directed to be more vigilant in future in making timely compliance. In the result, grounds of appeal raised by assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.