MR.LAKHAN,AGRA vs. ITO 2(1)(1), AGRA
Facts
The assessee preferred an appeal against the order of the CIT(Appeals) which confirmed an addition of Rs. 48,45,825/- made in the assessment order. The assessee argued that the CIT(Appeals) passed the order ex parte without affording adequate opportunity and without following principles of natural justice.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee failed to respond to notices from the CIT(Appeals) and also failed to make submissions before the Assessing Officer. However, the CIT(Appeals) was expected to provide reasons for the decision. The Tribunal found it appropriate to remit the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in passing an ex-parte order without affording adequate opportunity to the assessee, and whether principles of natural justice were violated.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 144, 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 130/Agr/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13
Mr. Lakhan, 431, Jajau, Vs. Income-tax Officer, Fatehpur Sikari, Kiraoli, Agra- Ward 2(1)(1), Agra. 283110. PAN : AIJPL0490J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. P.K. Sehgal, Advocate Department by Sh. Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR Date of hearing 21.05.2025 Date of pronouncement 29.05.2025
ORDER Per Sunil Kumar Singh, Judicial Member: This appeal has been preferred by assessee against the impugned order dated 21.08.2023 (communication of order on 06.02.2025) passed in Appeal No. CIT (Appeals) 2, AGRA/10340/2019-20 by the Ld.
Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), wherein the learned CIT(Appeals) has confirmed the addition of Rs.48,45,825/- made
vide assessment order dated 14.11.2019 passed u/s. 147/144 of the Act and dismissed assessee’s first appeal.
ITA No.130/Agr/2025
This appeal has been filed on the ground, in addition to other
grounds, that the ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in passing the impugned order
without affording proper and adequate opportunity to the
appellant/assessee to defend his case.
Perused the records and heard the ld. Representative for the
assessee and the learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue.
Learned AR of the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(Appeals) has
not followed the principles of natural justice while dismissing the appeal of
the assessee ex parte.
Learned DR has supported the impugned order.
Perusal of the impugned order shows that the assessee did not
respond to the notices dated 28.07.2021, 04.11.2022 and 11.07.2023
issued by the first appellate authority, resulting in passing ex parte
impugned order. The learned CIT(Appeals), however, 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. This apart, we also notice that
the assessee also failed to make submissions before the Assessing Officer
resulting in passing assessment u/s. 144/147 of the Act. For want of
assessee’s explanation, nature and source of cash deposit of
Rs.48,45,825/- could not be verified. In the circumstances and in the
interest of justice and fair play, we deem it just and appropriate to remit the 2 | P a g e
ITA No.130/Agr/2025
matter back to the file of learned Assessing Officer for framing the
assessment order afresh after seeking explanation of the assessee as to
the nature and source of the cash deposit in the bank account.. We order
accordingly. We further direct the assessee to be diligent and cooperative
in attending the assessment proceedings and making submissions before
the Assessing Officer for the expeditious and effective disposal. Assessee
shall refrain from seeking any adjournment but for compelling and
unavoidable reasons. Needless to say that learned Assessing Officer 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 dated 21.08.2023 is set aside.
Order pronounced in the open court on 29.05.2025.
Sd/- Sd/-
(MANISH AGARWAL) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 29.05.2025 *aks/-
