Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was against an order of the CIT(Appeals) which dismissed the appeal ex-parte. The CIT(Appeals) had confirmed additions made by the Assessing Officer after the assessee failed to appear and provide evidence. An adjournment petition filed by the assessee's representative was rejected.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the appeal was dismissed ex-parte due to non-appearance and lack of evidence. To meet the principle of natural justice, the Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(Appeals) and remitted the matter back with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(Appeals) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without discussing the merits, and if the assessee should be granted another opportunity to be heard.
Sections Cited
147, 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA-GAUHATI ‘e-COURT’, DB, KOLKATA
Before: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-(KZ) & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu
Per Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-President (KZ):- The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 22nd August, 2025 passed for Assessment Year 2018-19.
(A.Y. 2018-2019) Raju Ali 2. Shri Kishor Kumar Jain, FCA, Ld. Authorized Representative on behalf of the assessee filed a petition dated 7th January, 2026 requesting before the Bench for 15 days adjournment of hearing as he is suffering from severe teeth pain along with other ailments for the last few days and is not able to appear before the Bench. After going through the adjournment petition, we reject the adjournment petition filed by the ld. Authorized Representative on behalf of the assessee.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing. Therefore, we have decided to dispose of the appeal after hearing the ld. Departmental Representative and perusing the material available on record.
At the time of hearing, ld. Departmental Representative submitted that the ld. CIT(Appeals) has passed the order ex-parte as the assessee failed to produce satisfactory documentary evidences in support of his claim inspite of sufficient opportunities given. He also submitted that even the assessment order has been passed under section 147 read with section 144 of the Income Tax Act due to non-compliance from the side of the assessee with regard to the show-cause notice. He pleaded to uphold the order of ld. CIT(Appeals).
We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. A perusal of the impugned order clearly shows that as there was no response to the notices to substantiate the 2 (A.Y. 2018-2019) Raju Ali claim with documentary evidences and submissions, ld. CIT(Appeals) confirmed the addition made by the ld. Assessing Officer. It is also evident that the ld. CIT(Appeals) has not discussed the issue on merits and dismissed the appeal due to non-appearance. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) and in order to meet the principle of natural justice, remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, we also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the ld. CIT(Appeals) failing which the ld. CIT(Appeals) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits based on the materials available on the record. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 22/01/2026.