SHIV SHANKAR,MIRZAPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), MIRZAPUR
Facts
The assessee's income was assessed ex-parte at Rs. 87,46,000/- by the Assessing Officer under sections 147, 144, and 144B of the Income Tax Act for AY 2015-16. The subsequent appeal filed by the assessee before the CIT(A) was also dismissed ex-parte. The assessee contended that both authorities failed to provide reasonable opportunities and the CIT(A) did not pass a speaking order on merits.
Held
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) had a statutory duty under Section 250(6) of the I.T. Act to pass a speaking order on the merits of the appeal. Considering the lack of reasonable opportunity and the ex-parte nature of both the assessment and appellate orders, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order. All issues, including penalty matters, were restored to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment, with directions to provide reasonable opportunity to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) failed to provide reasonable opportunities to the assessee. Whether the CIT(A) erred by not passing a speaking order on the merits of the appeal as mandated by Section 250(6) of the I.T. Act.
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
