SHIV SHANKAR,MIRZAPUR vs. ITO WARD-3(1), MIRZAPUR
Facts
The assessee filed three appeals against ex-parte assessment orders by the Assessing Officer (AO) and subsequent ex-parte dismissal of appeals by the CIT(A) for AY 2015-16, where total income was assessed at Rs. 87,46,000/-. The core grievance was the lack of reasonable opportunity provided by both authorities and the CIT(A)'s failure to pass a speaking order on merits.
Held
The Tribunal determined that the CIT(A) was statutorily obligated under Section 250(6) to pass a speaking order. Consequently, the CIT(A)'s order was set aside, and the matters in dispute, including penalty issues, were restored to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment to be carried out after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity.
Key Issues
Whether the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) provided reasonable opportunity to the assessee and whether the CIT(A) fulfilled its statutory duty to pass a speaking order on the merits of the appeal.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 144B, 250(6), 271(1)(b), 271(1)(c)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD
Before: SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA & SHRI SUBHASH MALGURIA
PER BENCH:
(A) These three appeals have been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2015-16 against impugned appellate orders each dated 04/10/2024, DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1069374335(1), No.ITBA/ NFAC /S/250/2024-25/1069374478(1) and No.ITBA/ NFAC/ S/ 250/ 2024- 25/1069374609(1) respectively of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short].
(A.1) First we will take up appeal vide I.T.A. No.178/Alld/2024. The facts of the case, in brief, are that in this case assessment order dated 03/03/2023
I.T.A. Nos.178, 179 & 180/Alld/2024 Assessment Year:2015-16 2
was passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 read with section 144, read with section 144B of the I. T. Act whereby the assessee’s total income was assessed at Rs.87,46,000/-. The order passed by the Assessing Officer was an ex-parte order qua the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A). Vide impugned appellate order dated 04/10/2024, the assessee’s appeal was dismissed by the learned CIT(A). The order of learned CIT(A) was also passed ex-parte qua the appellant assessee.
(B.1) At the time of hearing, learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer as well as the learned CIT(A), both passed their respective orders without providing reasonable opportunities to the assessee. He further submitted that the learned CIT(A) did not pass speaking order on merits of the various grounds of appeal. In view of these submissions, the learned Counsel for the assessee contended that the issues in dispute should be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer, with the direction to pass fresh assessment order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.
(B.2) The learned Departmental Representative for Revenue expressed no objection to aforesaid submissions and contentions of learned Counsel for the assessee. He left the matter to the discretion of the Bench.
(C) We have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. We are of the considered opinion, in view of provisions of section 250(6) of the I. T. Act, that learned CIT(A) had statutory duty to pass speaking order on merits of the various grounds of appeal. In further consideration of the submissions made by the representatives of both sides, the order of learned CIT(A) is set aside and issues in dispute regarding addition made in the assessment order, are restored back to the file of the
I.T.A. Nos.178, 179 & 180/Alld/2024 Assessment Year:2015-16 3
Assessing Officer with the direction to pass de novo assessment order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.
(D) Regard imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(b) and 271(1)(c) respectively, representatives of both sides were in agreement to restore the issue of penalty to the file of the Assessing Officer, the fate of which will depend the order passed by the Assessing Officer in I.T.A. No.178/All/2024.
(E) In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.
(Order pronounced in the open court on 22/05/2025)
Sd/. Sd/. (SUBHASH MALGURIA) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) Judicial Member Accountant Member
Dated:22/05/2025 *Singh
Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., Lucknow
