Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to non-prosecution, as the assessee failed to appear despite multiple notices. The assessee contended that the CIT(A)'s order was ex-parte and lacked a proper opportunity to present their case.
Held
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s order was ex-parte and dismissed the appeal without examining the merits, solely on procedural grounds. The Tribunal deemed it fit to provide the assessee another opportunity for a just and fair assessment.
Key Issues
Whether the dismissal of the assessee's appeal by the CIT(A) for non-prosecution without examining the merits was justified, and if another opportunity should be granted.
Sections Cited
250, 144, 147, 69, 115BBE, 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “PATNA BENCH, PATNA
Before: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra
Assessment Year: 2017-18 Murari Prasad Khatri………….....…..…………………....Appellant Dadarmandi, G. Bagh, Patnacity, Bihar-800007. [PAN: ATTPK3693B] vs. ITO, Ward-5(2), Patna….….…….…............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances by: Shri Rakesh Verma, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : January 30, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order : January 31, 2025 आदेश / ORDER
Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member:
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 04.11.2023 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Jaipur [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).
Brief facts of the care are that in the case of the assessee for the assessment year 2017-18, assessment order was passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act vide order dated 14.12.2019 by making addition of Rs.10,78,500/- by treating the same as unexplained income u/s 69 r.w.s 115BBE of the Act.
Dissatisfied with the above order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Despite receiving three consecutive notices, the assessee failed to appear or present his case. The appeal of the assessee was dismissed due to non-prosecution by simply upholding the order of the Assessing Officer.
Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before this Tribunal raising various grounds. However, the primary contention of the assessee is that the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) was ex parte order without providing proper opportunity to the assessee to present his case. The ld. AR, therefore, requested before the Tribunal to provide another opportunity to substantiate his claim and has assured full compliance to the notices that will be issued by the authorities below.
On the other hand, the ld. DR did not oppose the prayer of the assessee and relied on the orders of the authorities below.
We, after hearing both the parties and reviewing the materials available on record, find that the order of the ld. CIT(A) is ex parte order denying the adequate opportunity to present the case by the assessee. We note that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee without going into merits and decided only on the ground of non-compliance on the part of the assessee. We, therefore, find that the dismissal of appeal solely on the procedural ground without examining the merits of the case which is essential u/s 250(6) of the Act, is not justified. In the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it fit to provide the assessee one more opportunity to substantiate his case to ensure just and fair assessment. We, therefore, remand back the issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to re-examine the case on merits after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee to represent his case. We also direct the assessee to diligently comply with the notices issued and promptly participate in the remand proceedings without any further delay.
In terms of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Kolkata, the 31st January, 2025.