RIDDHI AGRO INDUSTRIES, RAIPUR,RAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 458/RPR/2025Status: HeardITAT Raipur07 August 2025AY 2009-10Bench: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY (Judicial Member)5 pages
AI SummaryAllowed for statistical purposes

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT set aside the ex-parte dismissal order, remanding the matter back to the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for de novo adjudication on merits. The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) is statutorily obliged to dispose of appeals on merits and does not have the power to summarily dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution, citing the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay. The assessee was granted one final opportunity to comply with hearing notices.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC due to non-compliance, without addressing the merits of the case. The CIT(A) had issued repeated notices for submission of evidence and explanation, but the assessee failed to respond, leading to the ex-parte dismissal as per Para 4.1 of the impugned order.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A)/NFAC has the power to summarily dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution without adjudicating it on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 246A,Section 250,Section 250(4),Section 250(6),Section 251(1)(a),Section 251(1)(b),Section 251(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR

Before: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Agrawal, CA
For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Hearing: 07.08.2025Pronounced: 07.08.2025

आदेश / ORDER

PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM

1.

This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.CIT(A)/NFAC, dated 23.05.2025 for the assessment year 2009-10 as per the grounds of appeal on record.

2.

At the very outset, it is noted that as evident from Para 4.1 of the impugned order, the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC vide an ex-parte order had dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine due to non-compliance by the assessee. For the sake of clarity, the Para 4.1 of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC order is culled out as follows:

“4.1 Notices to the appellant were issued on dated 19.03.2025/07.04.2025 and 06.05.2025 affording opportunities of being and to furnish evidence/documents/explanation in support of his grounds of appeal. But even after repeated opportunities provided, the appellant has not submitted any submissions or evidences in support of his grounds of appeal which would require interference by the appellant authority in the impugned order. Hence there arises no need for interference as no valid explanation nor evidences were brought to notice of the appellate authority which would demand such interference.”

3.

The Ld. Sr. 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.

4.

I have carefully considered the contents in the documents/material available on record, submissions of both the parties. As per the aforesaid examination of the entire spectrum of the matter in the interest of natural justice, I 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.

5.

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 my 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.”

6.

Respectfully following the aforesaid order, I 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 as per similar terms. 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.

7.

As per the aforesaid terms, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

8.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 07th day of August, 2025.

Similar judgments

Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.

More judgments on Section 251(1)(a)

All 935 judgments and leading authorities on Section 251(1)(a) →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →