RAJRSHI SHAHU CHHATRAPATI BAHUUDESHIY SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, AURANGABAD

Submission of ld.Departmental Representative(ld.DR) : 3. The ld.DR for the Revenue relied on the order of Assessing Officer(AO) and ld.CIT(A)[NFAC].

Findings & Analysis : 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. In this case, ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee as assessee failed to file any reply to notices issued by ld.CIT(A). Ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated the grounds raised by the Assessee. Ld.AR submitted that one more opportunity may be provided to the Assessee.

4.1 Ld.CIT(A) held as under : “6.2 Now coming to the merits of the case, I have perused the order 3 passed by the Assessing Officer. The order is a speaking order, wherein Rajrshi Shahu Chhatrapati Bahuudeshiy Shikshan Prasarak Mandal the AO has discussed the facts of the case and has given cogent reasons and made addition on appropriate grounds. The appellant has neither said nor submitted any evidences to rebut the arguments marshaled by the Assessing Officer. Considering the reasons stated in the order of the Assessing Officer for making this addition, I have no reason to disagree with the order passed by the AO. Ground raised by the appellant is hereby dismissed.

2 In the facts & in the circumstances of the case and in the law, the Assessing Officer erred in making addition of Rs.13,35,780/- in all assessment years from 2014-15 to 2020-21 merely on the basis of statement of one of the employee of the Trust recorded during survey proceeding and on the basis of WhatsApp conversation without any discriminating evidence in respect of relevant A.Y. Therefore the said addition may be deleted. 4 Rajrshi Shahu Chhatrapati Bahuudeshiy Shikshan Prasarak Mandal 3 In the facts & in the circumstances of the case and in the law, the Assessing Officer assessed the income of the appellant without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard which is against natural justice and therefore the Assessment Order dated 30/09/2021 may be cancelled.

4 The appellant craves leaves to add/ modify/ amend/ delete/ all/ any of the grounds of appeal and lead evidence/additional evidences.

5.1 However, ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated these grounds.

Further Section 250(6) of the Act obliges the CIT(A) to dispose of an appeal in writing after stating the points for determination and then render a decision on each of the points which arise for consideration with reasons in support. Section 251(1)(a) and (b) of the Act provide that while disposing of appeal the CIT(A) would have the power to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul an assessment and/or penalty. Besides Explanation to sub-section (2) of Section 251 of the Act also makes it clear that while considering the appeal, the CIT(A) would be entitled to consider and decide any issue arising in the proceedings before him in appeal filed for its consideration, even if the issue is not 5 raised by the appellant in its appeal before the CIT(A). Thus once an Rajrshi Shahu Chhatrapati Bahuudeshiy Shikshan Prasarak Mandal assessee files an appeal under Section 246A of the Act, it is not open to him as of right to withdraw or not press the appeal. In fact the CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits. In fact with effect from 1st June, 2001 the power of the CIT(A) to set aside the order of the Assessing Officer and restore it to the Assessing Officer for passing a fresh order stands withdrawn.

Therefore, it would be noticed that the powers of the CIT(A) is coterminous with that of the Assessing Officer i.e. he can do all that Assessing Officer could do. Therefore just as it is not open to the Assessing Officer to not complete the assessment by allowing the assessee to withdraw its return of income, it is not open to the assessee in appeal to withdraw and/or the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal on account of non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee. This is amply clear from the Section 251(1)(a) and (b) and Explanation to Section 251(2) of the Act which requires the CIT(A) to apply his mind to all the issues which arise from the impugned order before him whether or not the same has been raised by the appellant before him. Accordingly, the law does not empower the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal for non- prosecution as is evident from the provisions of the Act.” Unquote.

6.1 Thus, the Hon‟ble Bombay High Court has categorically held that ld.CIT(A) has to decide the appeal on merit and ld.CIT(A) does not have any power to dismiss appeal for non-prosecution.

IT(SS)A Nos. 40, 41, 42 & 43/PUN/2025 and & 2935/PUN/2025 9. Since we have already discussed and decided the same issue in the “Lead Case – IT(SS)A No.39/PUN/2025”, the said decision shall mutatis-mutandis apply to all these appeals i.e. IT(SS)A Nos.40, 41, 42 & 43/PUN/2025 and & 2935/PUN/2025 also. Therefore, grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.