Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, an HUF, failed to file a return of income for AY 2017-18. The Assessing Officer reopened the case under section 147 based on information of interest income and made an addition of Rs. 31,96,652/- after non-compliance with statutory notices. The appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed for non-prosecution.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessment and appeal proceedings were ex-parte due to the assessee's non-compliance. Considering the assessee had raised multiple grounds, the Tribunal decided to set aside the orders of the lower authorities and remit the issue back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the appeals dismissed for non-prosecution at various levels should be allowed for fresh adjudication on merits due to ex-parte orders.
Sections Cited
147, 148, 144, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD
Assessee by : None Shri Shashank Ojha Revenue by : Date of hearing : 14.01.2026 Date of pronouncement : 11.02.2026 आदेश / ORDER The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to the Assessment Year 2017-18 is directed against the order dated 02.09.2025 of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of the Assessment Order dated 17.05.2023 passed u/s.144 r.w.s.147 of the Act.
When the case called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. I therefore proceed to adjudicate the appeal with the assistance of ld. Departmental Representative and available material on record.
Brief facts as emanating from the record are that the assessee is an HUF and has not filed return of income for the assessment year 2017-18. Based on the Insight information 2 Panchwadkar Shrihari Purshottam HUF available with the Department that the assessee has received interest of Rs.31,96,652/- the case reopened by way of issuance of notice u/s.148. Statutory notices u/s.142(1) were served upon the assessee and there was no compliance to such notices. In the said circumstances, ld. Assessing Officer added the interest so received by the assessee as Income from other sources and assessed the income at Rs.31,96,652/-.
Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) but however failed to appear on the given dates of hearing and ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee observing as under :
“4.2 It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.N. Bhattacharjee and Another (118 ITR 461) that appeal does not mean merely filing of memo of appeal but also pursuing it effectively. In cases where the appellant does not want to pursue the appeal, appellate authorities have inherent power to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution as held by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s Chemipol vs. Union of India in Excise Appeal No. 62 of 2009. While deciding the issue, the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay has referred to the observations of Hidayatullah, Chief Justice (as His Lordship then was) in Sunderlal Mannalal Vs. Nandramdas Dwarkadas AIR 1958 MP 260 wherein it was observed:- "Now the Act does not give any power of dismissal. But it is axiomatic that no court or tribunal is supposed to continue a proceeding proceeding before it when the party who has moved it has not appeared nor cared to remain present. The dismissal, therefore, is an inherent power which every tribunal possesses..” 4.3 This appeal has been filed by the ot claiming that the action of the Assessing Officer is not supported by facts and laws and that it is unjust. In such a situation, it is for the appellant to furnish submissions with relevant evidence(s), case laws, if any, to support the claim. The burden of proof is always on the person who makes the claim. In this case, it is the appellant who has made the claim by filing the appeal. Thus, in cases where a particular receipt is sought to be taxed as income, the initial onus is on the Assessing Officer to prove that it is taxable. Where, however, the assessee claims exemption, the burden is on the assessee to prove it to be exempt. Same is the position in case of all allowances, deductions, claims or 3 Panchwadkar Shrihari Purshottam HUF loss, etc. Since an appeal is nothing but the claim of the appellant that he has been unduly unjustifiably taxed, it is for the appellant to prove its case. The appellant has not availed any opportunity to do so. 4.4 This appeal has been filed by the appellant with a prayer to this office that the addition made by the AO amounting Rs.31,96,650/- to be deleted. In such a situation, it is for the appellant to furnish submissions with relevant evidence(s), case laws, if any, to support the claim. The 'burden of proof is always on the person who makes the claim. From the conduct of the appellant as per the facts noted above, it is clear that the appellant does not wish to pursue the appeal. Further, from the records, it is observed that the appellant has not submitted necessary evidences to satisfy the AO. Though the appellant filed appeal it remained non-compliant during the appellate proceedings and has not furnished any evidences to satisfy the appellate authority. Even otherwise on the merits of it also, I do not see any reason to differ with the findings of the AO since no attempt has been made by the assessee to discharge its onus. In my considered view, the findings of the AO in the assessment order are self-speaking and do not require any interference. Hence the appeal is dismissed both on facts and law.
In the result, the appeal is dismissed.”
5. Aggrieved with the impugned order the assessee has approached this Tribunal.
I have heard the ld. Departmental Representative and perused the record placed before me. Admittedly, the assessment in the case of assessee has been completed exparte u/s.144 r.w.s.147 of the Act owing to non-compliance on the part of assessee. Even during the course of appellate proceedings before the learned CIT(A), the assessee did not respond to the notices issued by the learned CIT(A) u/s.250 of the Act and learned CIT(A) has also passed exparte order. Therefore, it is clear that both the authorities have passed exparte orders. Before this Tribunal, assessee has raised eight grounds of appeal
raising various issues, however, taking note
4. Panchwadkar Shrihari Purshottam HUF the Ground No.1 raised by the assessee and considering the facts and circumstances, I deem it appropriate to remit the issues raised in the instant file to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication and deciding the issues in in light of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay). Needless to mention that assessee shall plead and prove its case in the set aside proceedings by furnishing all documentary evidences as called for by the ld.CIT(A). Assessee is directed to provide updated email id and contact detail to the department for receiving the notices from ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.