Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed appeals against the orders of the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC for three assessment years (2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18). During proceedings before the CIT(A), the assessee only made submissions requesting adjournments and did not present any arguments on the merits of the case. Consequently, the CIT(A) passed orders without adjudicating on the merits.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the assessee failed to make any merits-based submissions before the first appellate authority. In the interest of natural justice and considering the possibility that the assessee's counsel had made submissions at the tribunal, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s orders. The matters were remanded back to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication on merits, with directions for the assessee to comply with hearing notices.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) order, passed without merits-based submissions from the assessee due to continuous adjournments, should be set aside and remanded for a fresh adjudication on merits.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR
Before: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY
आदेश / ORDER
PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM
The captioned appeals preferred by the assessee emanates from the respective orders of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Raipur-3 dated 21.02.2025 for the assessment years 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 as per the grounds of appeal on record.
At the time of hearing, parties herein submitted that the facts and circumstances in all the matters are absolutely and substantially identical and issues are similar, therefore, after hearing the submissions of the parties all these three appeals are heard together and disposed off vide this consolidated order.
That even without going into the merits of the matters, taking A.Y.2015-16 as lead matter, it is noted that the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC at Pages 3 and 4 of its order had observed and held as follows: “The appeal was fixed for hearing on 03.11.2022, 05.12.2023, 13.12.2024 & 03.01.2025. The assessee furnished its reply on 24.11.2022 through ITBA portal. The reply of the assessee carefully perused and placed on record. In response to notice dt.09.12.2024 and hearing dt.13.12.2024, the assessee submitted on 10.12.2024 through ITBA portal as under:- I am writing to request an adjournment of the hearing scheduled for 13.12.2024 in the above-referenced matter. Due to prior professional commitments that require my immediate attention, I will be unable to attend the hearing on the scheduled date. Furthermore, my legal counsel is also 3 Deepesh Agrawal Vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Bilaspur 252 & 253/RPR/2025
unavailable on the said date due to unavoidable personal or professional reasons, and their presence is crucial for my effective representation. In light of these circumstances, I kindly request that the hearing be adjourned for at least 30 days to ensure proper preparation and fair representation of the matter. I sincerely apologize for any inconvenience caused and assure you of my commitment to cooperate fully with the proceedings. Again, in response to notice dt.16.12.2024 and hearing dt.03.01.2025, the assessee submitted on 06.01.2025 through ITBA portal as under: -This is continuation of my earlier communication dt.10.12.2024, wherein my request for adjournment was kindly approved. I am now compelled to seek a further adjournment of the hearing fixed for 03.01.2025 at 12:00 PM due to unforeseen professional commitments and the unavailability of my legal counsel, whose presence is crucial for my effective representation. I sincerely regret the inconvenience caused and respectfully request your kind consideration in granting an adjournment. I assure you of my utmost cooperation and readiness to comply with the proceedings at the earliest opportunity, Due to huge pendency of old appeals & Hon'ble Board's guidelines for prompt disposal of appeals pertains to various category, further adjournment cannot be granted. Therefore, reply dt.24.11.2022 is considered for final reply of the assessee.”
What transpires from the aforesaid para of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC’s order is that there has been no submission made by the assessee in respect of the grounds of appeal assailed before the first appellate authority and only two submissions that have been made is with regard to praying for adjournments in the matter. However, before this bench the Ld. Counsel submitted that they have made submissions before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC and also have submitted paper book regarding issues in contention.
4 Deepesh Agrawal Vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Bilaspur 252 & 253/RPR/2025
In these set of facts, the Ld. Sr. DR submitted that it would be appropriate if the matter is remanded back to the file of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC for denovo adjudication on merits whereby the assessee shall also get an opportunity once again to furnish requisite submissions and represent his case on merits.
Having heard the submissions of the parties herein, I am of the considered view that it is crystal clear from the facts on record from the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC that there has not been any submissions on merits before said authority by the assessee. That only two submissions were made by the assessee seeking adjournments and nothing else. However, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee made a statement at bar that they had made submissions before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC. Considering the entire facts of the case, submissions made by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee as well as considering the submissions of the Ld. Sr. DR in the interest of natural justice, the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC is set-aside and the matter is remanded back to its file for denovo adjudication as per law while complying with the principles of natural justice. The assessee is also directed to comply with all the hearing notices issued from the office of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC and represent his case on merits.
5 Deepesh Agrawal Vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Bilaspur 252 & 253/RPR/2025
As per the above terms grounds of appeal of the assesse are allowed for statistical purposes.
& 253/RPR/2025 A.Y.2016-17 & 2017-18
In so far the appeals filed by the assessee in & 253/RPR/2025 are concerned, in both these appeals Pages 3 & 4 of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC same facts emanates as were there in A.Y.2015-16 which are therefore only referred to and not being extracted for the sake of brevity.
Both the parties herein at the time of hearing had conceded that the facts and issues involved in the captioned appeals are similar and identical, therefore, my observations recorded in A.Y.2015-16 shall “mutatis-mutandis” apply in & 253/RPR/2025 for A.Y.2016-17 & 2017-18. In these cases also, I set- aside the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC and remand the matters back to its file on similar terms.
As per the above terms grounds of appeal of the assesse are allowed for statistical purposes.
6 Deepesh Agrawal Vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Bilaspur 252 & 253/RPR/2025
In the result, appeals of the assessee in & 253/RPR/2025 for A.Y.2016-17 & 2017-18 are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the combined result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in open court on 05th day of June, 2025.