Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed against an ex-parte order of the CIT(A) which dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution without considering its merits. The assessee also sought admission of additional evidence to substantiate its case.
Held
The tribunal allowed the assessee's application for additional evidence, subject to a cost of Rs. 5,000 payable to the Prime Minister's National Relief Fund. The CIT(A)'s ex-parte order was set aside, and the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment with proper opportunity to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing an appeal ex-parte for non-prosecution without deciding on merits, and the admissibility of additional evidence.
Sections Cited
250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha
Year : 2020-21 Rajesh Kumar Mishra The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ B-5, Ananddeep Society Ward-1(2)(2) v/s. T.B. 13, Chhani Jakat Naka Vadodara – 390 007 Vadodara – 390 024 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./PAN:AKZPM 140 Q (अपीलाथ'/ Appellant) (!( यथ'/ Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Alok Shah, CA Revenue by : Shri Rajiv Garg, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 25/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 23/02/2026 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] dated 15/01/2025 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for the Assessment Year (AY) 2020-21.
At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has brought our attention to the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) to submit the same as the Rajesh Kumar Mishra vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2020-21 2 ex-parte order of the Ld. CIT(A). Further, the Ld. CIT(A) has not discussed the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee on merits, but simply dismissed the appeal of the assessee for want of prosecution. As per the settled law, the Ld. CIT(A) was supposed to decide each of the issue on merits. Further, the assessee has moved an application for admission of additional evidences also, wherein, it has been submitted that certain documents, such as, confirmation from parties, copies of PANs and bank statements and sale invoices, etc. are required to be furnished for just and proper decision of the case.
3. After considering the rival submissions, the application of the assessee for furnishing of additional evidences is hereby allowed, subject to payment of a cost of Rs.5,000/- to be deposited in the Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund. The impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer (AO) for de novo assessment. The assessee will produce the receipt of such deposit before the AO. Subject to fulfilment of the above condition, the AO will pass the assessment order afresh in accordance with law. Needless to say, that the AO will give proper and adequate opportunity to the assessee to furnish the details and evidences.
With the above observations, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 23 /02/2026. ( Narendra Prasad Sinha ) Judicial Member अहमदाबाद/Ahmedabad, िदनांक/Dated 23/02/2026 टी.सी.नायर, व.िन.स./T.C. NAIR, Sr. PS Rajesh Kumar Mishra vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2020-21