Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee preferred appeals against separate ex-parte orders passed by the Ld. CIT(A) for multiple assessment years. The main grievance was that the CIT(A) passed these orders without affording an opportunity of being heard, which was contended to be against the principle of natural justice.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) passed ex-parte orders without going into the merits of the case. Upholding the principle of natural justice, the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders and remanded the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, directing the CIT(A) to provide proper opportunity to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether ex-parte orders passed by the CIT(A) without providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee violate the principles of natural justice and warrant a remand for fresh adjudication on merits.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI LALIET KUMAR & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY
आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, AM :
Captioned appeals for different assessment years have been preferred by the assessee against the separate orders, each dated 13.01.2025, passed by the Ld.
304 TO 306-Chd-2025 2 Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi.
Though numerous identical and similar grounds have been filed by the Assessee for each assessment year but the main grievance of the Assessee is that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed by the orders ex-parte without affording an opportunity of being heard which is against the principle of natural justice.
At the very outset, the ld. Counsel of the Assessee submitted before the Bench that the orders for all the three assessment years were passed ex-parte by the Ld. CIT(A) without affording an opportunity of being heard to the Assessee and without going into merits of the case. It has further been submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the facts in appropriate manner and just confirmed the orders passed by the the DCIT, Exemptions. It has further been submitted that the Assessee has a fair case on merits. A prayer has, therefore, been made by the Counsel for the Assessee to 304 TO 306-Chd-2025 3 remand the matter back to the CIT(A) for all the assessment years for adjudication afresh.
Per contra, the ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below.
We have considered the submissions made by the ld. Counsel for the Assessee along with findings given by the authorities below in their respective orders. We find that though the CIT(A) has mentioned in his findings that the Assessee was time and again asking for adjournments. In any case, CIT(A) is supposed to pass order on merit on the basis of material available on record. That has not been done in this case. So, keeping in view the element of natural justice, we are of the considered view that one more opportunity should be afforded to the Assessee to present its case before the CIT(A). Therefore, we are inclined to remand this matter back to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudication afresh on merit. In view of this, the impugned orders of the CIT(A) in all the assessment years are set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for decision afresh. Needless to say, that the 304 TO 306-Chd-2025 4 ld. CIT(A) will give proper opportunity to the Assessee to present its case and to furnish necessary evidences and details. The Assessee is also directed to present its case before the Ld. CIT(A) as and when called for and will not contribute in unnecessary delay in the hearing of the appeal.