Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for assessment year 2011-12. During the hearing, the assessee did not appear, and the Revenue's representative supported the CIT(A)'s order. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal on the grounds that the assessee failed to furnish plausible explanations and appeared uninterested in prosecuting the appeal.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee was ex-parte before both the AO and CIT(A). While acknowledging the assessee's lethargy, the Tribunal emphasized the need to decide the case on merits. Therefore, the matter was restored to the AO for a fresh decision with one more opportunity for hearing, subject to the assessee's cooperation.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to the assessee's non-appearance and lack of explanation, or if a fresh opportunity for hearing should be granted.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 54B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES, SMC, JAIPUR
Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & DR MITHA LAL MEENA, AM
Date of Hearing : 30/09/2024 Date of Pronouncement: 29/10/2024 ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 19-06-2024, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ hereinafter referred to as (NFAC) ] for the assessment year 2011-12 raising the grounds of appeal as mentioned at From 36. 2.2 During the course of hearing, the Bench noted that none appeared on behalf of the assessee when the case was called out for hearing. 2.3 On the other hand, the ld.DR supported the order of the ld. CIT(A)
SHRI NARAYAN SINGH RATHORE VS ITO, WARD 6(3), JAIPUR 2.4 The Bench has heard the ld. DR and perused the orders of the lower authorities and noted that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that the assessee had failed to furnish any plausible explanation before him and thus the assessee is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. The narration as made by the ld. CIT(A) in his order is reproduced as under:- ‘’3.4 I have perused the grounds of appeal
, facts of the case and the assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act. The appellant has not produced any material to controvert the finding of AO with any document, evidence which could rely upon. It has also been observed that the appellant neither disclosed the transaction about sale of land (capital asset) nor made any claim for deduction u/s 54B by filing an Income Tax Return within stipulated time. On merit AO’s order appears to be reasonable as per law. The appellant failed to furnish any proceeding, too. From the above conduct of the assessee, it is clear that the appellant is not interested in prosecuting its appeal. In the event, I have no reason to interfere with the findings of the AO. In such circumstances, I dismiss the claim of the appellant.
4. In the result, the appeal is dismissed.’’ 2.5 From the records, it is noted that since it is an admitted fact that the assessee is ex-parte before the AO and also before the ld. CIT(A). Therefore, he could not put forth his defence. It was the bounded duty of the assessee to appear before the statutory authorities as and when called for. It is noticed that various opportunities were provided to the assessee for settling the issue but the assessee remained lethargic and unserious in pursuing his case for which a cost of Rs.2.000/- is imposed upon the assessee which will be deposited by the assessee in the Prime Minister Relief Fund. However, we are of the view that lis between the parties has to be decided on merits so that nobody’s rights could be scuttled down without providing opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Hence, the matter is restored