Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of approximately 13 days due to the wife's serious illness. The CIT(Appeals) dismissed the assessee's first appeal ex-parte without affording an opportunity of hearing.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It was held that the CIT(Appeals) order was not sustainable as it was passed ex-parte without considering the merits and without adhering to the principles of natural justice.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(Appeals) order dismissing the appeal ex-parte without providing an opportunity of hearing to the assessee is sustainable?
Sections Cited
250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH & SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH
ORDER
PER : SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal has been preferred by assessee against the impugned order dated 28.02.2025 passed in Appeal No.NFAC/2017- 18/10238836 by Ld. CIT (A)/NFAC, Delhi u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2018- 19, wherein learned CIT(Appeals) has dismissed assessee’s first appeal exparte.
At the very outset, we notice that the assessee filed this second appeal on 12.05.2025 against the impugned order passed on 28.02.2025 by a delay of about 13 days. The reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay are that the counsel of appellant could not prepare the appeal within the stipulated period of limitation due to his wife’s serious ailment, which led the assessee to file this appeal with a short delay. The assessee has also filed an affidavit in support of delay condonation application. Prayed to condone the delay.
Considering the aforesaid reasons, given in the delay condonation application supported by uncontroverted affidavit and in the interest of justice, we deem it just and proper to condone the said delay in filing this appeal. The delay is accordingly condoned.
This appeal has been preferred on the ground, in addition to other grounds, that the ld. CIT(Appeals) has dismissed the first appeal without affording an opportunity of hearing to the assessee in violation of the principles of natural justice.
Perused the records and heard learned representative for the assessee and ld. departmental representative for the revenue.
Learned AR has submitted that the impugned order of ld. CIT(Appeals) is not sustainable, having been passed without affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
Ld. DR, on the other hand, has submitted that sufficient opportunities were afforded to the appellant by ld. CIT(Appeals). He supported the impugned order.
Perusal of the impugned order shows that during the appellate proceedings, learned CIT(Appeals) issued various notices on 17.04.2024, 26.12.2024, 30.01.2025 and on 21.02.2025, which remained un-responded on behalf of the assessee. Such a conduct of the assessee cannot be appreciated. It is, however, noticed that learned CIT(Appeals) has passed ex-parte impugned order without any 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. In the circumstances and in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it just and appropriate to afford last opportunity to the assessee and remit the matter back to the file of learned CIT(Appeals) for adjudication on merits.
We order accordingly. We further direct the assessee to be diligent and cooperative in attending the hearings and making submissions before the learned CIT(Appeals) for the expeditious and effective disposal.
Assessee shall refrain from seeking any adjournment but for compelling and unavoidable reasons. Needless to say that learned CIT(Appeals)
3 | P a g e shall ensure the observance of the principles of natural justice. The appeal is liable to be allowed accordingly.
In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. The impugned order dt. 28.02.2025 is set aside.
Order pronounced in the open court on 30.07.2025.