Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeals for Assessment Years 2019-20 and 2020-21 were dismissed ex parte by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act. The dismissal occurred because the assessee failed to respond to various opportunities granted, leading the CIT(A) to confirm the Assessing Officer's order without discussing the merits of the issues.
Held
The Tribunal held that in the interest of justice, the appeals should be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). The CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeals on merits after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, with a clear instruction for the assessee to cooperate in the assessment proceedings.
Key Issues
Whether the ex parte dismissal of appeals by the CIT(A) without adjudicating on merits is justified when the assessee fails to appear, and if the appeals should be restored for a fresh decision on merits.
Sections Cited
Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, GUWAHATI BENCH, GUWAHATI
Assessment Year: 2020-21 Moin Uddin Lasker, Algapur – 5, HO-Hailakandi, Assam - 788150 [PAN: ATMPL4893P]……..…...……………....Appellant vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Guwahati, Aayakar Bhawan, Christian Basti, GS Road, Guwahati - 781005................................ Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Abhishek Bansal, AR Department represented by : Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. CIT Date of concluding the hearing : 11.11.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 17.11.2025 O R D E R
Per Rajesh Kumar, AM
The present appeals arise from orders dated 31.01.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”) by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Central NER, Guwahati [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)].
At the outset, we note that the appellate orders were passed by the ld. CIT(A) ex parte when the assessee did not respond to various opportunities granted by the ld. CIT(A). Consequently, Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeals by confirming the order of the Assessing Officer without discussing and deciding the issues on merits. Under the Moin Uddin Lasker circumstances, in our view, the interest of justice would be well-served if the appeals are restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to de- cide the same on merits after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to cooperate in the as- sessment proceedings failing which adverse inference may be drawn against the assessee as the assessee has hopelessly failed to attend the proceedings in the first round. Accordingly, we restore the issues in both the appeals to the file of the ld. CIT(A).
In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.