Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2016-17 was dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A)/NFAC due to non-compliance, without addressing the merits of the case. The assessee subsequently appealed to the ITAT, whose adjournment application was rejected.
Held
The ITAT ruled that the CIT(A) is statutorily bound to dispose of an appeal on merits and cannot summarily dismiss it for non-prosecution. Consequently, the ITAT set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the case back for a de novo adjudication on merits, granting the assessee a final opportunity to comply with notices.
Key Issues
Can the CIT(A) dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution without considering its merits? What is the statutory obligation of the CIT(A) when disposing of an appeal?
Sections Cited
Section 250, Section 250(4), Section 250(6), Section 251(1)(a), Section 251(1)(b), Section 251(1)(h), Section 251(2), Section 246A
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, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR
Before: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY & SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI
आदेश / ORDER
PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM:
The present appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 27.05.2025 for the assessment year 2016-17 as per the grounds of appeal on record.
At the time of hearing, none appeared for the assessee. However, an adjournment application has been filed by the assessee which is rejected. The matter is heard after recording the submissions of the Ld. CIT-DR and on careful perusal of the material available on record.
At the very outset, it is noted that as evident from Paras 6.1 & 6.2 of the impugned order, the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC vide an ex-parte order had dismissed the appeal of the assessee due to non-compliance by the assessee without dealing with the merits of the case. For the sake of clarity, the Paras 6.1 & 6.2 of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC’s order are culled out as follows: “6.1 During the appellate proceedings, the appellant was provided 03 opportunities in total by this office to submit documents and make submissions in response to the appeal filed. However, the assessee has not exercised this option despite multiple reminders. The table below indicates the dates and the compliance status of the various notices issued. Date of Notice Compliance Date Remarks 10/05/2024 17/05/2024 No details
furnished nor any petition for adjournment was received. 12/02/2025 19/02/2025 No details furnished nor any petition for adjournment was received. 09/05/2025 16/05/2025 No details furnished nor any petition for adjournment was received.
6.2 The conduct of the Appellant, as inferred from the aforesaid table, evidences that the Appellant is not interested in pursuing the Appeal.”
The Ld. CIT-DR has fairly conceded that the matter may be adjudicated denovo on merits before the first appellate authority providing one final opportunity to the assessee.
We have carefully considered the contents in the documents/material available on record. As per the aforesaid examination of the entire spectrum of the matter in the interest of natural justice, we deem it fit and proper to provide one final opportunity to the assessee to represent his case on merits before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC.
On a perusal of the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, it is observed that the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine for non-compliance without dealing with the merits of the case. In our considered view, once an appeal is preferred before the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, it becomes obligatory on his part to dispose off the same on merit and it is not open for him to summarily dismiss the appeal on account of non-prosecution of the same by the assessee. In fact, a perusal of Sec.251(1)(a) and (b), as well as the “Explanation” to Sec.251(2) of the Act reveals that the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC remains under a statutory obligation to apply his mind to all the issues which arises from the impugned order before him. As per the mandate of law the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC is not vested with any power to summarily dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution. The aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bom). In the aforementioned case the Hon’ble High Court had observed as under:
"8. From the aforesaid provisions, it is very clear once an appeal is preferred before the CIT(A), then in disposing of the appeal, he is obliged to make such further inquiry that he thinks fit or direct the AO to make further inquiry and report the result of the same to him as found in Sec. 250 of the Act. Further, Sec. 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. Sec. 251(1)(a) and (h) 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-s. (2) of s. 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 raised by the appellant in its appeal before the CIT(A). Thus once an assessee files an appeal under s. 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 w.e.f. 1st June, 2001 the power of the CIT(A) to set aside the order of the AO and restore it to the AO for passing a fresh order stands withdrawn. Therefore, it would be noticed that the powers of the CIT(A) are co-terminus with that of the AO i.e. he can do all that A.O could do. Therefore, just as it is not open to the AO 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 s. 251(1)(a) and (b) and Explanation to Sec. 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.”
Respectfully following the aforesaid order, we set-aside the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC and remand the matter back to its file for denovo adjudication while complying with the principles of natural justice. At the same time, it is directed that this being the final opportunity, the assessee shall duly comply with the hearing notices from the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC. The Ld.CIT(Appeal)/NFAC shall accordingly pass order in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act within three months from receipt of this order.
As per the aforesaid terms, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 10th day of September, 2025.