Loading judgment…
Facts
The appeals were filed against ex-parte orders passed by the NFAC for Assessment Years 2016-17 and 2017-18. The assessee's authorized representative could not appear due to a severe health issue, as supported by an affidavit.
Held
The Tribunal held that an assessee has a right to be heard, and non-appearance due to a reasonable cause cannot be a reason for the CIT(A) to not deal with the points on merits. The CIT(A) ought to have dealt with the issues raised on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing ex-parte orders without considering the merits of the case, despite the assessee having a reasonable cause for non-appearance.
Sections Cited
250(2)(a), 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI & SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU
ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeals arises out of separate orders passed by the NFAC, Delhi dated 03.02.2024 for A.Y. 2016-17 and 29.01.2024 for A.Y. 2017-18.
Page 2 of 4 & 602/Bang/2024
At the outset, the Ld.AR submitted that the orders passed by the Ld.CIT(A) / NFAC are ex-parte order for both years under consideration. He submitted that various notices were issued to the assessee on ITBA portal. However, due to severe health issue faced by the authorised representative of the assessee, could not furnish relevant information / details to support the claim before the NFAC. The Ld.AR submitted that affidavit dated 07.05.2024 has been placed in the paper book at pages 32-33 explaining the same. The Ld.AR prayed for the appeals to be remanded in order to consider the claim on merits in the light of evidences filed by the assessee.
The Ld.DR objected to the prayer raised by the Ld.AR. He submitted that there is no evidences to substantiate the reason provided by the assessee for not appearing before the Ld.CIT(A). He thus prayed for the order of the Ld.CIT(A) to be confirmed.
We have perused the submissions advanced by both sides in the light of records placed before us.
We note that admittedly assessee did not appear before the Ld.CIT(A), though various opportunities were granted. The affidavit filed by the authorised representative clarifies that there was a reasonable cause for non-appearance.
Page 3 of 4 & 602/Bang/2024
An assessee has “the right to be heard at the hearing of the appeal” and such a right cannot be put against the assessee. Before an appeal can be disposed of, a fair and reasonable opportunity of hearing is to be essentially extended to the assessee. The non-exercise of this right by the assessee cannot be a reason enough for the CIT(A)’s not dealing with the points so raised before him on merits.
5.1. The exercise of the “right to be heard at the hearing of the appeal” by “the appellant, either in person or by an authorized representative condition”, under section 250(2)(a), is not a condition precedent for the disposal of appeal on merits in accordance with the scheme of Section 250(6). Therefore, irrespective of the non-appearance of the assessee before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) ought to have dealt with the issues so raised by the assessee on merits and to pass order by way of speaking order and in accordance with the law.
Accordingly, in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to remand the appeal back to the Ld.CIT(A) for necessary consideration. Needless to say that proper opportunity of being heard must be granted to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to furnish all relevant details in support of its claim. The Page 4 of 4 & 602/Bang/2024 Ld.CIT(A) is directed to pass a detailed order on merits after considering the evidences furnished by assessee. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 07th June, 2024.