Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed two appeals against separate appellate orders from the CIT(A) for AY 2016-17 and 2020-21. For AY 2016-17, reassessment under section 147 resulted in an ex-parte addition of Rs. 88,79,500/- under section 68, taxed under section 115BBE, as the assessee failed to respond to a notice during the Covid-19 pandemic. For AY 2020-21, additions were made for unexplained bank credit of Rs. 8,44,07,089/- and unexplained expenses u/s 57 of Rs. 14,10,623/-. In both cases, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeals for non-prosecution despite providing multiple opportunities.
Held
The Tribunal, applying the Principle of Natural Justice, found that both the AO and CIT(A) passed ex-parte orders without adequately considering the circumstances, especially the Covid-19 pandemic for AY 2016-17. It set aside the assessment and appellate orders, remanding both cases back to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. The AO was directed to provide the assessee one more final opportunity to present all relevant materials and decide the cases on merits.
Key Issues
1. Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing appeals ex-parte for non-prosecution. 2. Whether the ex-parte assessment orders were valid when the assessee claimed insufficient opportunity, especially during the Covid-19 pandemic.
Sections Cited
147, 143(3), 148, 68, 115BBE, 57
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH
Before: DR. BRR Kumar & Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar
ITA No: 2063 & 2064/Ahd/2025 Asst. Years: 2016-17 & 2020-21 Meet Corporation The ITO, TF 313 Super Plaza, Ward-3(1)(2), Nr. Lad Society, Vs Ahmedabad Sandesh Press Road, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad Gujarat-380058 PAN: ABAFM6201G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented: Shri Mehul Thakkar, A.R. Revenue Represented: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 09-02-2026 Date of pronouncement : 11 -02-2026 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-
These two appeals are filed by the Assessee as against separate appellate orders both dated 28-08-2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “CIT(A)”), arising out of the reassessment order passed under section 147 and assessment order u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Years 2016-17 and 2020- 21 respectively.
& 2064/Ahd/2025 A.Ys. 2016-17& 2020-21 2 Meet Corporation vs. ITO
The Grounds of Appeal
raised by the assessee are as follows:
1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal ex parte without appreciating the genuine cause for non-appearance.
2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the reopening under section 147 of the Act, which is bad in law and void ab initio.
3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of t 88,79,500/- under section 68 of the Income Tax Act.
4. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, or modify any of the above grounds at the time of hearing.
2. Ld. Counsel submitted that the notice u/s. 148 dated 31-03- 2021 was issued during the Covid-19 Pandemic period which has resulted in not filing proper reply before the A.O. which has resulted in passing exparte assessment order making addition of Rs.88,79,500/- being cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act and also taxed u/s. 115BBE of the Act
3. On filing appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who has given three opportunities of hearing between 04-06-2025, 17-06-2025 and 27- 06-2025 and dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. Ld. Counsel pleaded that one more opportunity of hearing be given to the assessee to explain its case with relevant materials.
Ld. CIT-DR appearing for the Revenue strongly opposed the above submission of the assessee.
We have carefully considered the submissions of rival parties. It is seen that notice u/s. 148 was issued during peak Covid-19 Pandemic period namely 31-03-2021. It is further seen from the & 2064/Ahd/2025 A.Ys. 2016-17& 2020-21 3 Meet Corporation vs. ITO assessment order, the assessee vide its letter dated 13-01-2022 citing some medical issue and requested for adjournment. It is thereafter on 23-03-2022, the Ld. A.O. passed exparte order by making addition u/s. 68 of the Act. Even before Ld. CIT(A) three opportunities were given by which were within a period of 24 days. Therefore in the interest of Principle of Natural Justice, we deem it fit to set-aside the matter back to the file of Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and to give one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee and decide the case on merits. Needless to say the assessee should make use of this final opportunity by producing all relevant materials before the Assessing Officer.
ITA No. 2064/Ahd/2025 for A.Y. 2020-21
The assessee participated in the hearing wherein addition of Rs.8,44,07,089/- made on account of credit amount in the bank accounts not explained by the assessee and expenses u/s. 57 of the Act amounting to Rs.14,10,623/- not explained by the assessee.
On appeal against the assessment order, ld. CIT(A) who has granted three hearing opportunities on 20-05-2025, 22-05-2025 and 11-07-2025. Since assessee failed to comply passed exparte order. Before us based on the undertakings of the Ld. Authorized Representative, this matter is also set-aside back to the file of & 2064/Ahd/2025 A.Ys. 2016-17& 2020-21 4 Meet Corporation vs. ITO Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and direct to give one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee and decide the case on merits. Needless to say the assessee should make use of this final opportunity by producing all relevant materials before the Assessing Officer.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in is treated as allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 11 -02-2026