Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed its return of income for AY 2017-18. The Assessing Officer assessed the total income at Rs.1,49,92,450/-. The assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(Appeals), which was dismissed ex parte. The assessee has filed this second appeal before the Tribunal.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(Appeals) had issued multiple notices for response, but the assessee failed to submit. However, the CIT(Appeals) passed an ex-parte order without substantial discussion on merits, failing to provide reasons for the decision as required. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the CIT(Appeals) for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(Appeals) without proper adjudication on merits and without providing reasons for the decision is valid.
Sections Cited
143(2), 142(1), 143(3), 69A, 131, 133, 250(6)
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
ORDER PER : SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal has been preferred by assessee against the impugned order dated 15.04.2025 passed in Appeal No. CIT (A), Gwalior/10762/2019-20 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”) for the assessment year 2017-18, wherein the ld.
CIT(Appeals) has dismissed assessee’s appeal ex parte.
Briefly stating, assessee e-filed return of income on 15.03.2018, declaring total income of Rs.50,65,830/-. Case was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS. Statutory notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued and served upon assessee. After considering assessee’s partial response on ITBA portal, the Assessing Officer assessed assessee’s total income at Rs.1,49,92,450/-, vide assessment order dated 24.12.2019 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act.
Aggrieved, assessee preferred first appeal before ld. CIT(Appeals), who dismissed assessee’s appeal ex parte.
Assessee has filed this second appeal on the ground that the ex parte impugned order is bad in law as passed without asking for the remand report from the Assessing Officer and ignoring the fact that neither the provision of section 69A was attracted nor any inquiry was made by the Assessing Officer u/s. 131/133 of the Act.
At the very outset, we notice that ld. CIT(Appeals) issued notices dated 07.01.2021, 04.11.2022, 22.08.2023, 29.07.2024 and 06.12.2024 to assessee for his response. However, assessee failed to make any submission before first appellate authority. It is, however, noticed that learned CIT(Appeals) passed ex-parte impugned order without any substantial discussion on the merits of the case, whereas learned 2 | P a g e 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 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. The appeal is, thus, liable to be allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
The impugned order dated 15.04.2025 is set aside.
Order pronounced in the open court on 27.10.2025