RAM SWAROOP AGARWAL,GWALIOR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3), GWALIOR, GWALIOR
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(Appeals) dismissing their first appeal. The assessee sought condonation of delay in filing the present appeal, citing reasons of inadvertent misplacement of documents due to work pressure. The delay was condoned.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(Appeals) had passed an ex-parte order without substantial discussion on the merits and without properly outlining the points for determination, decision, and reasons as required by law. While the assessee might have sought adjournments or failed to respond to notices, the order was not passed in compliance with the principles of natural justice.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(Appeals) order is sustainable when passed ex-parte without proper adjudication on merits and in violation of natural justice principles. Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.
Sections Cited
250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961
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
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 306/Agr/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18
Ram Swaroop Agarwal, Vs. Income-tax Officer, Through legal heir Vinod Kumar Ward 1(3), Gwalior. Agarwal, Bhatiyara Mohalla, Bada Bazar, Datia, Gwalior. PAN : ABXPA1808L (Appellant) (Respondent)
Assessee by Sh. Ashok Vijaywargiya, CA Department by Sh. Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Date of hearing 17.07.2025 Date of pronouncement 30.07.2025
ORDER PER : SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal has been preferred by assessee against the impugned order dated 20.03.2025 passed in Appeal No.CIT (A),
Gwalior/10514/2019-20 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 2017-18, wherein learned CIT(Appeals) has dismissed
assessee’s first appeal exparte. 2. At the very outset, we notice that the assessee filed this second appeal on 31.05.2025 against the impugned order dated 20.03.2025 by
ITA No.306/Agr/2025
a delay of about 11 days. The reasons mentioned in the application for
condonation of delay are that the appellant/assessee handed over all
the necessary documents to the staff of his representative/CA, but the
same were inadvertently placed in wrong folder at the office of the Ld.
AR due to work pressure of time barring assessment cases, which led to
file the appeal with a delay of 11 days. Ld. AR has also filed an affidavit
in support of assessee’s 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 ex
parte 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. 2 | P a g e
ITA No.306/Agr/2025
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
30.01.2021, 04.11.2022, 24.06.2024, 08.07.2024, 19.07.2024,
25.02.2025 and 12/03.2025, but the assessee either chose to seek
adjournments or filed no response. It is, however, noticed that learned
CIT(Appeals) has passed ex-parte impugned order 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. 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) shall ensure the observance of the 3 | P a g e
ITA No.306/Agr/2025
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. 20.03.2025 is set aside.
Order pronounced in the open court on 30.07.2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 30.07.2025 *aks/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra
4 | P a g e
