Facts
The assessee filed appeals against orders of the CIT(A) which dismissed their appeals for non-prosecution. The assessee argued that they sought adjournments due to compilation of details, but were not given sufficient opportunity. The Revenue objected to the assessee's request to restore the appeals.
Held
The Tribunal observed that although the assessee failed to file submissions, they should not be deprived of substantive justice. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A) orders and restored the appeals to the CIT(A) for re-adjudication after providing an opportunity of hearing.
Key Issues
Whether the dismissal of appeals for non-prosecution without sufficient opportunity to the assessee is justified, and if the matter should be restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI “E” BENCH: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
ORDER PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM: All these appeals are filed by the assessee against the separate orders of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-29, Delhi (‘ld. CIT(A) in short) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, all are dt. 19.03.2025for Assessment Year 20116-17 to 2020-21.
Since all the appeals have common issues which are interlinked with each other, therefore, they are taken together and decided by a common order.
At the outset, it is seen that all appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) for non-prosecution. Ld. AR submits that Ld. CIT(A) has issued notices of hearing, in response to which assessee sought adjournments as necessary details in support of the grounds taken were under compilation however, the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee to represent its case. Ld. AR thus prayed that all the appeals may be sent back to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication.
2 IT No.3545 to 3549/Del/2025 New Vision Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT 4. Per contra, the Ld. CIT DR has objected to the request of the assessee.
Heard both the parties. From the perusal of the appellate orders, it is seen that Ld. CIT(A) has provided several opportunities to the assessee however, the assessee failed to file any submission and sought adjournments only, thus the ld. CIT(A) was compelled to confirm the additions made by the AO. It is true that assessee has not filed any submission before ld. CIT(A) in support of the grounds of appeal taken but due to that reason alone, assessee should not be deprived of substantive justice. In view of these facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we set aside all the orders of ld. CIT(A) and restore back them to the file of ld. CIT(A) to re- adjudicate the same in accordance with law after providing the opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to participate before the ld. CIT(A) and file all the necessary evidences in support of the grounds of appeal taken in all the appeals. With these directions, ground of appeal No.3 taken by the assessee in all appeals is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Since, we have already remanded all the appeals of the assessee to the file of ld. CIT(A) by allowing the ground of appeal No. 3 taken by the assessee, thus the remaining grounds become academic and requires no adjudication.
In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 02.12.2025.