RAM DEVI,JHANSI vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE , AGRA

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 170/Agr/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16

Ram Devi, 275/B-1, Near Prema Vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Kunj Vivah Ghar, Budhha, Agra Jhansi (UP). PAN : CDGPD6685M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Department by Sh. Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT/DR Date of hearing 20.05.2025 Date of pronouncement 16.06.2025

ORDER PER : SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal has been preferred by assessee against the impugned order dated 29.09.2023 passed in Appeal No. CIT (A)-iv/knp/10305/2014- 15 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Kanpur-4 u/s.

250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), wherein the learned first appellate authority has dismissed assessee’s first appeal ex parte for non-prosecution, resulting in confirming the

addition of Rs.5,35,000/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s. 69 of the Act on account of unexplained investment in immovable property, vide assessment order 23.12.2022 passed u/s. 144 r.w.s. 153C of the Act.

ITA No.170/Agr/2023

pointed out by the Registry, inasmuch as, the assessment year 2024-25

was mentioned in the appeal fee challan submitted in this appeal for A.Y.

2015-16. Defect memos to this effect were also issued to the assessee,

who, vide letter dated 26.05.2025, has submitted that it was due to

typographical mistake that A.Y. 2024-25 was wrongly mentioned in the

challan, whereas the challan was actually paid for A.Y. 2015-16, hence,

the appeal fee challan be treated for A.Y. 2015-16. She has also filed

copy of an application for rectification addressed to DCIT Central Circle

Agra and her affidavit, deposing therein that due to clerical typographical

mistake, A.Y.’ 2024-25’ was wrongly mentioned in the challan in place of

A.Y. ‘2015-16’. It is also sworn in the affidavit that there is no mis-

utilization of said challan. The Registry has also submitted its report

dated 28.05.2025, stating that the mistake, noted above, seems to be a

clerical mistake. In view of all this, we admit the appeal as regular for

adjudication on merits.

erred in passing the impugned order merely on surmises and conjecture

without affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

2 | P a g e

ITA No.170/Agr/2023

the ld. Departmental Representative, who has supported the impugned

order.

the ld. CIT(Appeals) on 24.06.2023, 28.08.2023, 06.09.2023 and

15.09.2023, but the assessee neither responded to any of the notices nor

filed any submission before the first appellate authority. Such

irresponsive conduct of the assessee cannot be appreciated. However, it

is seen that the first appellate authority has not passed the ex parte

impugned order on merits, whereas ld. 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

3 | P a g e

ITA No.170/Agr/2023

observance of the principles of natural justice. The appeal is liable to be

allowed accordingly.

impugned order dt. 29.09.2023 is set aside.

Order pronounced in the open court on 16.06.2025.

Sd/- Sd/-

(MANISH AGARWAL) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 16.06.2025 *aks/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra

4 | P a g e