Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed appeals against the orders of the CIT(A) which had dismissed the appeals for want of prosecution. The assessee contended that they were not given a reasonable opportunity of hearing by the CIT(A). The revenue, however, argued that sufficient opportunities were provided to the assessee who failed to appear or furnish details.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had granted several opportunities, but the assessee failed to comply. However, in the interest of justice, the appeals were restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. A cost of Rs. 10,000/- per appeal was imposed on the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeals for want of prosecution without providing adequate opportunity of hearing, and whether the matter should be restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
Income Tax Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
O R D E R Per Bench
These are appeal appeals filed by the assessee against the separate separate orders of the ld CIT(A)-Patna-3 all 3 all dated 22.5.2024 in Appeal No.CIT(A),Ranchi CIT(A),Ranchi/10116/2018- 19, No.CIT(A),Ranchi/10119/2018 19, No.CIT(A),Ranchi/10119/2018-19 and No.CIT(A),Ranchi/10809/2019 19 and No.CIT(A),Ranchi/10809/2019-20, for the assessment year the assessment years 2014-15, 2016-17 & 2017-18, respectively 18, respectively.
Shri Khubchand T Pandya, ld Sr Shri Khubchand T Pandya, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue and Shri DR appeared for the revenue and Shri Devesh Poddar,ld AR appeared for ld AR appeared for the assessee.
P a g e 1 | 3 to 311/RAN/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2016-017 & 2017-18
It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals of the assessee for want of prosecution without giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Ld AR pleaded that if this Court grants the assessee one more opportunity by restoring these appeals to the file of the learned AO, so that the assessee will be able to substantiate its case before the AO. Therefore, he prayed that the appeal be restored to the file of the learned Assessing Officer.
In reply, ld Sr Departmental Representative on the other hand, the learned D.R. submitted that despite the learned CIT(A) provided sufficient opportunities to the assessee, the assessee did not appear before the learned CIT(A) and not furnished relevant details. He strongly supported the orders passed by the learned CIT(A).
We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the ld CIT(A) clearly shows that the CIT(A) has granted several opportunities to the assessee to substantiate its case but the assessee failed to comply with the notices, ultimately, the orders passed by him are ex-parte orders. Before us, ld AR undertakes that he will cooperate the proceedings and requested to restore the matter to the file of the AO. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the issues are restored to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate in the set aside proceedings before the AO. The assessee is also directed to furnish all the documents with his possession before the AO to substantiate its claim. As the assessee has not responded to the notices of the ld P a g e 2 | 3 to 311/RAN/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15, 2016-017 & 2017-18 CIT(A), a cost of Rs.10,000/- per appeal is imposed on the assessee to be deposited with Jharkhand Income Tax Bar Association to be paid within 60 days from the date of issue of this order, failing which, the orders passed by ld CIT(A) stand confirmed. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason.
6.. In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 12/06/2025.