SHRI VIPAN GUPTA ,JAMMU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL- CIRCL;E, JAMMU
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 05.10.2023 for Assessment Year 2017-18, which had summarily dismissed the assessee's appeal. The CIT(A)'s order emanated from an order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Held
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) rejected the appeal summarily without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard, thereby violating principles of natural justice. With the consent of both parties, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the matter back for fresh adjudication after granting adequate opportunity of being heard and considering the case on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in a summary manner without providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard, violating principles of natural justice.
Sections Cited
143(3), 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR.
Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA
Per: DR. M.L. Meena, AM.:
This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order passed by ld.
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-5, Ludhiana, [Hereinafter referred to as
“the CIT appeal”] dated 05.10.2023 which has emanated from the order u/s
143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 31.12.2019 passed by the Deputy
Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Jammu.
Having heard both both the sides and perusal of the record we find that the
learned CIT appeal has rejected the appeal of the assessee in summary manner by
applying MultiPlan India Ltd vide para 5 of the impugned order, as under:
“5. Under these circumstances, it is apparent that the appellant is not interested in pursuing the appeal. During the appellate proceedings, no compliance has been made and no submissions have been filed despite repeated opportunities. In this regard, reliance is also placed on following case laws: (i) CIT vs. Multiplan India Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del) (ii) Estate of Late Tukojirao Hokar vs. cm 223 ITR 840 (M.P.) (iii) New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495 (P&l-I) (iv) CIT vs. B.N. Bhattachargee and another 118 ITR 461 (SC). Since, the observations of the AO have not been rebutted by the appellant, therefore, the additions made by the AO are found sustainable and the various grounds of appeal raised by the appellant are liable to be dismissed.” 3. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that the Ld. CIT, (A) has passed
the impugned order Under section 250(6) of the Income tax Act, 1961 in haste
and casual manner without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard in
violation of the principles of natural justice. He requested that in view of the
principles of natural justices, the impugned order may be set aside and remanded
back To the file of the Ld. CIT appeal to adjudicate the matter afresh after
granting adequate opportunity of being heard to the appellant assasse and
considering the written submissions filed on the record and may be filed during
the fresh appellate proceedings before the learned CIT appeal. The Ld. AR
undertakes to corporate in furnishing all the information may be required by the
learned CIT appeal for the adjudication of the appeal on the issue raised by the
assessee.
The Ld. CIT (DR) has no objection to the request of the assessee in the light
of the principles of natural justice.
From the record, it is evident that the Ld. CIT(A) has rejected the rejected
the appeal of the assessee in summary manner by applying MultiPlan India Ltd. In
view of the principles of natural justices, we consider it deem fit that it would be
just fair to set aside and remanded back the impugned order to the file of the Ld.
CIT appeal to adjudicate the matter afresh after granting adequate opportunity of
being heard to the appellant assasse and pass an speaking order on merits of the
case after considering the written submissions filed on the record and may be
filed during the fresh appellate proceedings before the learned CIT appeal. The
Ld. AR undertakes to corporate to furnish all the information may be required by
the learned CIT appeal for the adjudication of this appeal.
Accordingly, we restore back the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT (A) to
adjudicate afresh after considering the written submission and evidence of the
assessee after granting sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assesse.
In the result, the captioned appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical
purposes.
Order pronounced on 26.09.2025 in the open Court.
Sd/- Sd/- (UDAYAN DASGUPTA) (DR. M. L. MEENA) Judicial Member Accountant Member
AKV/DOC*
Copy of the order forwarded to:
(1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4) The CIT (Appeals) (5) The DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By order
