Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed appeals against orders of the CIT(A) which had dismissed the appeals on technical grounds, primarily for want of proper documentation. The assessee contended that the original appeal documents were filed physically, but due to migration to a faceless system, these might have been missed or not properly processed by the NFAC.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had made several attempts to submit the required documents, but there were issues with their processing, especially after the migration from physical to faceless appeal proceedings. It was also observed that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeals without deciding them on merits due to the lack of documentation.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeals on technical grounds without considering the merits, especially when the assessee claimed to have filed the documents and faced issues due to system migration.
Sections Cited
143(3), 147, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI B.M. BIYANI & SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI
आदेश/ O R D E R
Per Bench:
This bunch of eleven (11) appeals filed by assessee for Assessment-Years [“AYs”] 1996-97 to 2002-03 & 2004-05 to 2007-08 is directed against eleven (11) separate orders of first-appeals, all dated 17.06.2025 and passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A), NFAC”], which in turn arise out of respective assessment-orders dated 29.03.2014
Page 1 of 6 to 707 & 703 to 704/Ind/2025 A Ys:1996-1997 to 1998-99 & 1999-2000 to 2000-01 & & 717, 718 to 721/Ind/2025 A Ys:2001-02 & 2002-03, 2004-05 to 2007-08 passed by learned Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-3(1), Indore [“AO”] u/s 143(3)/147 of Income-tax Act, 1961.
We have heard learned Representatives of both sides and carefully perused the case record.
Learned Representatives of both sides are ad idem that the grounds raised by assessee in all these appeals and the underlying facts/issues involved are identical, therefore these appeals are disposed of by this single order for the sake of brevity and convenience. For the sake of reference, the grounds raised in first appeal of AY 1996-97 are re-produced below:
“1.That the Id. CIT(A) erred in treating the appeal defective and dismissed on want of documents already submitted on 28.04.2014. 2.That the Id. CIT(A) erred in not considering the fact that the entire reassessment proceedings are bad in law and void ab initio. 3.That the Id. CIT (A) erred in not considering the facts and submission of the appellant and dismissed the case on technical grounds. 4.That the appellant craves leave to alter, amend, delete, add OR modify any ground of appeal
.”
4. Ld. AR for assessee invited our attention to the order of first-appeal being passed by CIT(A) for AY 1996-97 reading as under and submitted that in all matters, similar order has been passed:
Page 2 of 6 to 707 & 703 to 704/Ind/2025 A Ys:1996-1997 to 1998-99 & 1999-2000 to 2000-01 & & 717, 718 to 721/Ind/2025 A Ys:2001-02 & 2002-03, 2004-05 to 2007-08
Page 3 of 6 to 707 & 703 to 704/Ind/2025 A Ys:1996-1997 to 1998-99 & 1999-2000 to 2000-01 & & 717, 718 to 721/Ind/2025 A Ys:2001-02 & 2002-03, 2004-05 to 2007-08
Thereafter it emerged, on further discussions and perusal of case record, that the assessee filed requisite documents of first-appeal (Form No. 35, Grounds of Appeal, Statement of Facts, etc.) to CIT(A), Indore on 28.04.2014 under “physical mode” then prevailing [copies of the documents so filed are placed in case file]. Subsequently, the proceeding of first-appeal
Page 4 of 6 to 707 & 703 to 704/Ind/2025 A Ys:1996-1997 to 1998-99 & 1999-2000 to 2000-01 & & 717, 718 to 721/Ind/2025 A Ys:2001-02 & 2002-03, 2004-05 to 2007-08 was migrated to Faceless System and the CIT(A), NFAC passed impugned orders under Faceless System. Therefore, due to migration of assessee’s first appeals from physical regime to faceless regime, there was a change from CIT(A), Indore to CIT(A), NFAC and hence the papers filed by assessee under physical mode to CIT(A), Indore might have missed attention or may not be available to the new CIT(A), NFAC. Therefore, in the situation, the impugned orders passed by CIT(A), NFAC dismissing assessee’s first-appeals on the footing of non-prosecution and also on the footing of non-filing of requisite documents (Form No. 35, Grounds of Appeal, Statement of Facts, Assessment Order, etc.) are not proper. Faced with this situation, we set aside the impugned orders passed by CIT(A), NFAC and remit all these matters to the file of CIT(A), NFAC for adjudication afresh after giving fresh opportunities to assessee. The Ld. AR for assessee acknowledged in open court that the assessee shall avail those opportunities; re-file the copies of documents as may be required by CIT(A), NFAC and also make a full representation to CIT(A), NFAC without seeking unnecessary adjournments.
Ordered accordingly.
Page 5 of 6 to 707 & 703 to 704/Ind/2025 A Ys:1996-1997 to 1998-99 & 1999-2000 to 2000-01 & & 717, 718 to 721/Ind/2025 A Ys:2001-02 & 2002-03, 2004-05 to 2007-08 6. Resultantly, these appeals are allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in open court on 13/01/2026