Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed multiple appeals against ex parte orders of the CIT(A) for various assessment years. In some appeals, the assessee conceded to not having represented its case before the CIT(A) and requested restoration to the Assessing Officer. In others, the appeals were against ex parte penalty orders.
Held
The Tribunal restored the quantum appeals to the file of the Assessing Officer in the interest of justice, noting that the assessment orders were ex parte and the assessee had not provided all details. Consequently, the penalties levied were quashed, with liberty granted to the Assessing Officer to initiate fresh proceedings.
Key Issues
Whether ex parte orders of CIT(A) should be restored to the Assessing Officer, and the impact of such restoration on consequential penalty proceedings.
Sections Cited
271(1)(b), 271(1)(c), 271AAC, 271D
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY
Assessee represented by Shri Devesh Poddar, A.R. Department represented by Shri Rajib Jain, CIT-DR Date of hearing 07/01/2026 Date of pronouncement 07/01/2026 O R D E R PER: BENCH 1. These are the group of 19 appeals filed by the assessee(s) against the separate orders of the ld. CIT(A), Patna-3, Patna dated 12/06/2024, 26/11/2024, 30/11/2024 for the A.Y. 2014-15 to 2019-20 respectively. As all the issues in all these appeals relate to the common issues, therefore, they are being disposed off by this common order.
Shri Devesh Poddar, ld. AR is represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Rajib Jain, ld. CIT-DR is represented on behalf of revenue.
141, 143, 145, 146 and 160/Ran/2025, these are quantum matters, it was fairly agreed by the ld. AR that the assessee has not represented its matters before the ld. CIT(A). It was a submission that in the interest of justice, the issues may be restored to the file of the Assessing to 147 & 152 to 160/Ran/2025 Divya Construction Vs DCIT Officer in so far as even before the Assessing Officer, the assessment order is an ex parte order and there has been no proper compliance.
In reply, the ld. CIT-DR submitted that the assessee should be asked to file written submissions for the non-compliance before the ld. CIT(A) and why the issues should be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer. It was then informed to the ld. CIT-DR that the requirement of a written submission is either at the prerogative of the Bench or that of the assessee. A written submission cannot be demanded by the respondent.
Considering the prayer of the ld. AR as also the submissions, in the interest of justice, the issues in these appeals are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer as it is noticed that the assessee has not provided all the details before the Assessing Officer and the order of the ld. CIT(A) is admittedly an ex parte order.
In the result, all these appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes.
140, 142, 144, 147, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158 and 159/Ran/2025, these are the appeals against the ex parte orders of the ld. CIT(A) for the various assessment years confirming the penalties levied under various provisions of Section 271(1)(b), 271(1)(c), 271AAC and Section 271D. As the quantum appeals have all been restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for readjudication and the very foundation for the levy of penalties no more survive, the penalties levied stand quashed. Liberty is granted to the Assessing Officer to initiate fresh penalty proceedings as and to 147 & 152 to 160/Ran/2025 Divya Construction Vs DCIT where required in accordance with law.
In the result, all these appeals of the assessee are allowed. Order pronounced in open court on 07th January, 2026.