ANJANI KUMAR @ ANJANI KUMAR SINGH,PATNA vs. ITO WARD-6(5), PATNA

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 14.10.2022 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).

No one has appeared on behalf of the assessee in spite of serving notice of hearing and the Tribunal cannot keep this appeal pending for indefinite time due to non-representation. Therefore, we proceed to decide the appeal with the help of ld. DR and also considering the material available on record.

Brief facts of the case are that in the case of the assessee, an assessment order was passed on 19.12.2018 by making an addition of Rs.2,05,42,010/- on account of long-term capital gains for the year under consideration u//s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act.

Dissatisfied with the above order, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) but the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by the upholding the order of the Assessing Officer on the ground that the assessee did not appear or complied with the notices issued during the appellate proceedings.

Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed a second appeal before this Tribunal raising various grounds. However, at the time of hearing, no one appeared before the Tribunal nor any representation has been filed on behalf of the assessee although consecutive notices were served upon the assessee.

On the other hand, the ld. DR supported the orders passed by the authorities below.

We, after hearing the ld. DR and perusing the materials available on record, find that the order of the ld. CIT(A) is ex parte order and the ld. CIT(A) simply upheld the order of the Assessing Officer without examining the merits of the case. 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 its 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 its case. We also direct the assessee to diligently comply with the notices issued and duly participate in the remand proceedings to avoid any further delay.

In terms of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.