SHREE SARDAR PATEL VISHWAVIDHYA SANSTHAN,RAJKOT (PEDHLA, JETPUR) vs. THE ITO (EXEMPTION) WARD-1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT
Facts
The assessee's assessment for AY 2017-18 was completed ex parte under Section 144. The subsequent appeal to the Ld. CIT(A) was also dismissed ex parte without adjudication on merits, purportedly due to the assessee's advocate's non-appearance and the assessee's claim of being an illiterate person from a remote village not receiving notices.
Held
The Tribunal found both the assessment order and the CIT(A)'s ex parte order to be non-speaking and in violation of natural justice and Section 250(6). Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remitted the case back to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment, subject to the assessee paying a cost of Rs. 2,000/- to the Prime Minister Relief Fund.
Key Issues
The key issues were the validity of ex parte assessment and appellate orders due to alleged non-service of notices and lack of opportunity of being heard, and whether the case warranted a remand for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
250, 144, 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI & SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA
आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18, is directed against the order under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) (in short “Ld.CIT(A)”,dated 06.03.2025, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144 of the Act dated 28.11.2019.
ITA No. 162/RJT/2025 A.Y.17-18 Sh.Sardar Patel Vishwavidhya Sansthan
At the outset, on merit, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee resides in remote village and illiterate person, therefore notices were not served during assessment proceedings. Hence, assessee could not appear in assessment proceedings. On appeal, before Ld. CIT(A) by assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed appeal as ex parte without adjudicating on merit as the advocate appointed by assessee did not appear before Ld.CIT(A) and as a result, the Ld. CIT(A) has passed ex parte order. Therefore, Ld. Counsel contended that because of mistake of advocate of assessee, the assessee should not be penalized and therefore matter may be remitted back to the file of Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
The ld. DR of the Revenue has submitted that he did not have any objection if the matter is remitted back to the file of Assessing Officer, however, he contended that minimum cost of Rs.2,000/- should be imposed on assessee on account of non-compliance attitude of the assessee.
We have heard both the parties and gone through materials available on record. We note that in the assessee’s case under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s 144 of the Act and the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex parte order and non-speaking order, therefore, we do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee. We note that ld. CIT(A) has not decided the issue in respect of the ground raised by the assessee in Memo of Appeal as per the mandate of provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) has not examined assessment records and relevant documents and has not passed any speaking order. Considering the above facts, we note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play
ITA No. 162/RJT/2025 A.Y.17-18 Sh.Sardar Patel Vishwavidhya Sansthan
require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. On account of non-compliance attitude of the assessee a cost of Rs.2,000/- is imposed on the assessee. Accordingly, we hold that the interests of justice would be met, if the Assessing Officer re- adjudicates the entire issue afresh subject to payment of cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) by the assessee to the credit of the “Prime Minister Relief Fund” within 2 weeks from receipt of this order. If the assessee makes default in making the payment of cost then the consequential proceedings would be deemed, as vacation of our instant remand order. We set aside the order of CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer with a direction to pass de novo assessment order in accordance with law after granting adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to be more vigilant and diligent and to furnish all the details and explanations as needed by the Assessing Officer by not seeking adjournment without valid reasons. With these directions, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed, for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced on 20/08/2025 in the Open Court.
Sd/- Sd/- (DINESH MOHAN SINHA) (DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI) �या�यकसद�य/Judicial Member लेखासद�य/ Accountant Member राजकोट/Rajkot �दनांक/ Date: 20/08/2025 DKP Outsourcing Sr.P.S आदेशक��ितिलिपअ�ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant ��यथ�/ The Respondent आयकरआयु�/ CIT
ITA No. 162/RJT/2025 A.Y.17-18 Sh.Sardar Patel Vishwavidhya Sansthan
आयकरआयु�(अपील)/ The CIT(A) िवभागीय�ितिनिध, आयकरअपीलीयआिधकरण, राजकोट/ DR, ITAT, RAJKOT गाड�फाईल/ Guard File By order/आदेश से, सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, राजकोट
