Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed a return for AY 2014-15, which was initially accepted. The assessment was reopened under Section 148, and additions were made due to non-compliance. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A), but the appeal was dismissed ex parte for non-prosecution.
Held
The Tribunal noted that both the assessment order and the CIT(A)'s order were passed ex parte without adjudicating the issues on merits. In the interest of justice, the assessee was granted one more opportunity to present their case.
Key Issues
Whether the lower authorities erred by passing ex parte orders without proper adjudication of the issues on merits, and if the assessee should be granted another opportunity.
Sections Cited
143(3), 148, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BENCH-RANCHI
Before: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay
order
: February 11, 2026 ORDER
Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”) dated 29.08.2024 passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”).
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income for the assessment year 2014–15, declaring total income of ₹38,61,970. The case was selected for scrutiny, and assessment under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was completed on 15.12.2016, accepting the returned income at ₹38,61,970. Subsequently, the assessment was reopened by issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act. However, the assessee did not comply with the notice issued under section 148. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer made additions of ₹12,88,048 and ₹34,77,395 to the income of the assessee on account of unexplained items, and completed the reassessment by determining the total income at ₹86,27,413, as against the originally returned income of ₹38,61,970.
Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A). However, due to non-prosecution on various dates of hearing, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex parte and sustained the reassessment order, without adjudicating the issues on merits.
Before us, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the orders of the lower authorities were passed ex parte and prayed that one more opportunity be granted to the assessee to present his case and substantiate his claims. On the other hand, the learned DR submitted that the assessee had repeatedly failed to appear before the authorities and supported the impugned order.
We, after hearing the rival submissions and perusing the material available on record, we find that both the assessment order and the appellate order have been passed ex parte, without proper adjudication of the issues on merits. In our considered view, in the interest of justice and fair play, the assessee deserves one more opportunity to present his case. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication of all the issues, after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to comply with all notices and to cooperate in the assessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer shall pass a speaking order in accordance with law.
6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 11th February, 2026.