MEERA YADAV,JHANSI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), AGRA
Facts
The assessee filed appeals against orders of the CIT(Appeals) which dismissed the assessee's first appeals ex parte for AY 2013-14, 2017-18, and 2018-19. The assessee had failed to make submissions before the CIT(Appeals) on various occasions.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(Appeals) passed ex-parte orders without substantial discussion on merits and expected to provide points for determination, decision, and reasons. The matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for adjudication afresh with proper opportunity to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in dismissing the assessee's appeals ex parte without providing proper opportunity, violating the principles of natural justice.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 148, 142(1), 144, 144B, 37, 143(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 359, 394 & 360/Agr/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2017-18 & 2018-19
Meera Yadav, 1, Near RTO Vs. DCIT, Circle 2(1)(1), Office, Shivaji Nagar, Jhansi. Jhansi. PAN :AAGPY2889M (Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by Sh. Deependra Mohan, CA Department by Sh. Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR
Date of hearing 16.10.2025 Date of pronouncement 26.11.2025
ORDER PER : SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
These three appeals have been preferred by assessee against separate impugned orders dated 23.06.2025, 30.06.2025 & 23.06.2025
passed in Appeals Nos. NFAC/2012-13/10068044, NFAC/2016- 17/10480546 and NFAC/2017-18/10251199 for the assessment years 2013-14, 2017-18 and 2018-19 respectively, by the Ld. Commissioner of
Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), wherein the ld. CIT(Appeals) has dismissed assessee’s first appeals ex parte.
ITA Nos. 359, 394 & 360/Agr/2025
Since, all these appeals pertain to the same assessee and some
of the grounds involved in these appeals are common, these appeals
were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated
order for the sake of convenience and brevity. The facts involved in each
of the appeals are narrated as under :
ITA No. 359/Agr/2025 (A.Y. 2013-14):
In this case, assessee filed her return of income for A.Y. 2013-14,
declaring total income at Rs.39,50,080/-. Assessing Officer noticed that
the assessee had paid Rs.13,652/- as interest on VAT, Rs.11,32,838/-
as interest on royalty and Rs.3,059/- as interest on TDS as per its profit
and loss account. Assessing Officer was of the view that any interest on
dues is a penalty and not acceptable as expenses under the Act.
Hence, case was reopened u/s. 147 of the Act. Notice u/s. 148 was
issued on 15.01.2020 and served upon the assessee. Assessee,
however, did not file any return of income in response thereof.
Thereafter various notices u/s. 142(1) and show cause notice u/s. 144 of
the Act were issued to the assessee, but she did neither respond nor file
any documentary evidence in support of her claim. Assessing Officer,
therefore, rejecting the claim of assessee, made addition of
Rs.11,49,549/- u/s. 37 of the Act, vide assessment order dated
22.09.2021 passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 and 144B of the Act. 2 | P a g e
ITA Nos. 359, 394 & 360/Agr/2025
ITA No. 394/Agr/25 (A.Y. 2017-18):
In this case, assessee filed her return of income on 28.03.2018,
declaring total income at Rs.29,20,650/-, which was processed u/s.
143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, based on the information available with
the department that the assessee had made unexplained investment in
immovable property amounting to Rs.53,84,984/- during the financial
year 2016-17 (as per election affidavit filed during MP General Election
2018, Niwari Constituency), case was reopened u/s. 147 of the Act.
Notice u/s. 148 was issued, in response to which, assessee filed ITR on
02.07.2024 declaring the same income as declared in original return of
income. Thereafter, Assessing Officer made detailed inquiries and
issued various notices u/s. 142(1) and show cause notices u/s. 144 of
the Act. Considering assessee’s response, Ld. Assessing Officer
completed the assessment and made various additions on account of
undisclosed business receipts, unexplained investment and undisclosed
interest income and assessed total income of assessee at
Rs.4,23,44,210, vide assessment order dated 19.03.2025 passed u/s.
147/144/144B of the Act.
ITA No. 360/Agr/2025 (A.Y. 2018-19):
In this case, assessee filed her return of income for A.Y. 2018-19
on 03.11.2018, declaring total income at Rs.17,43,710/-, which was 3 | P a g e
ITA Nos. 359, 394 & 360/Agr/2025
processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, based on information
received from Investigation Wing that the assessee had made
unexplained investment of Rs.53,84,984/- in immovable property during
the period 2013 to 2018 (five consecutive years), proceedings u/s. 147 were initiated and notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued on 30.03.2022.
Assessee did not respond to the said notice nor filed any return of
income response thereof. Thereafter several notices u/s. 142(1) and show cause notice u/s. 144 were issued, but the same remained un-
responded on behalf of the assessee. Assessing Officer, therefore,
completed the assessment u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 and 144B of the Act, vide order dated 06.03.2023 by making addition of Rs.10,76,997/- (1/5th of Rs.53,84,984).
CONCLUSION 7. Aggrieved by aforesaid three assessment orders for three different assessment years, noted herein above, assessee preferred first appeals
before learned CIT(Appeals), who dismissed assessee’s all three appeals ex parte. 8. These second appeals have been filed on the ground, in addition
to others, that learned CIT(Appeals) has erred in dismissing assessee’s first appeals without providing proper opportunity to the appellant, which is against the principle of natural justice. 4 | P a g e
ITA Nos. 359, 394 & 360/Agr/2025
Perused the records. Heard learned representative for assessee
and learned Sr. DR for revenue.
We note that ld. CIT(Appeals) issued notices to the assessee on
various occasions in all the three appeals. The appellant assessee,
however, failed to make any submission before the first appellate
authority. It is, however, noticed that learned CIT(Appeals) passed ex-
parte impugned orders without any substantial discussion on the merits
of the case, whereas learned CIT(Appeals) was expected to state the
points for determination, decision thereon and the reasons for the
decision as provided u/s. 250(6) of the Act. We, therefore, deem it just
and appropriate to remit the matter back to the file of learned CIT(A) for
adjudication afresh on merits after affording proper opportunity of
hearing to the assessee. The ld. CIT(Appeals) is directed to pass
speaking and reasoned order. We direct the assessee to be cooperative
in attending the hearings and making submissions before the learned
CIT(A) for the expeditious and effective disposal. Needless to say, that
learned CIT(A) shall ensure the observance of the principles of natural
justice. All the three appeals of assessee are, thus, liable to be allowed
for statistical purposes.
5 | P a g e
ITA Nos. 359, 394 & 360/Agr/2025
In the result, ITA No. 359, 394 and 360/Agr/2025 are allowed for
statistical purposes. The impugned orders dated 23.06.2025, 30.06.2025
& 23.06.2025 are set aside.
Order pronounced in the open court on 26.11.2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 26.11.2025 *aks/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra
6 | P a g e
