Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, Suparn Vaidik, challenged additions of Rs.56,61,707/- as unexplained cash credit under Section 69A r.w. Section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act for A.Y. 2017-18. The first appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was summarily dismissed for non-prosecution and non-compliance of statutory notices without addressing the merits.
Held
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred by dismissing the appeal without discussing the merits, which is contrary to Section 250(6) of the Act. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the matter back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, ensuring the assessee is given a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Key Issues
1. Whether the CIT(A) was justified in summarily dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without deciding on merits. 2. Validity of additions made under Section 69A read with Section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Sections Cited
143(3), 69A, 115BBE, 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “G” DELHI
Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA
The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [‘CIT(A)’ in short] dated 17.10.2023 arising from the assessment order dated 30.12.2019 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning A.Y. 2017-18.
As per its grounds of appeal, the assessee has challenged the additions of Rs.56,61,707/- as unexplained cash credit under Section 69A of the Act r.w. Section 115BBE of the Act. The assessee has further challenged the summary disposal of first appeal by the CIT(A) on account of non prosecution.
3. On perusal of the order of the CIT(A), we straightaway notice that the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal before it for want of prosecution and non compliance of statutory notices by a very cryptic order without any discussion on merit. The CIT(A) has declined to entertain the adjournment invoking the doctrine of vigilantibus non dormientibus wherein its is ordained so- • Law will help only those who are vigilant. Law will not assist those who are careless of his/her right. In order to claim one’s right, she/he must be watchful of his/her right. Only those persons, who are watchful and careful of using his/her rights, are entitled to the benefits of law.
• A person who has kept mum during the statutory period cannot claim for the enforcement of right after the statutory limitation.
We straightway refer to Section 250(6) of the Act which enjoins that the CIT(A) shall state the points for determination before it and the decision shall be rendered on such points along with reasons for the decision. Thus, it is incumbent upon the CIT(A) to deal with the grounds on merits even in ex parte order. In view of Section 250(6) of the Act, the CIT(A) has no power to dismiss an appeal on account of non-prosecution. This view is also taken by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra HUF (2017) 291 CTR 614 (Bom.). A bare glance of the order of the CIT(A) shows that CIT(A) has not addressed itself on the various points placed for its determination at all and dismissed the appeal of assessee for default in non-appearance. Needless to say, the CIT(A) plays role of both adjudicating authority as well as appellate authority. Thus, the CIT(A) could not have shunned the appeal for non-compliance without addressing the issue on merits.
In the totality of the circumstances, we consider it just and expedient to restore the matter back to the CIT(A) in the larger interest of justice with a view to enable the assessee to avail proper opportunity for disposal of appeal by the CIT(A) on various points. Needless to say, the assessee shall extend full co-operation to the CIT(A) without any demur, failing which, the CIT(A) shall be at liberty to conclude the appellate proceedings in accordance with law. Hence, the order of the CIT(A) appealed against, is set aside and all the issues raised in the impugned appeal are restored back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 07/08/2024