LALIT MOHAN DIXIT,FIROZABAD vs. ITO 2(2)(2), FIROZABAD
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(Appeals) passed an ex-parte order without discussing the merits of the case. It was expected that the CIT(Appeals) would state points for determination, decision, and reasons as per Section 250(6) of the Act. To ensure justice and fair play, the Tribunal decided to provide a last opportunity to the assessee.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a non-filer, deposited Rs. 26,17,600/- in his bank account. The Assessing Officer initiated reassessment proceedings and added the amount as income from undisclosed sources. The CIT(Appeals) confirmed this addition. The assessee did not respond to notices from the Assessing Officer and the first appellate authority.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in passing an ex-parte order without adjudicating on the merits of the case, thus violating principles of natural justice.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA BENCH, AGRA
Before: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH
ORDER
Per Sunil Kumar Singh, Judicial Member:
This appeal has been preferred by assessee against the impugned order dated 11.01.2024 passed in Appeal No.CIT(Appeal)-2, Agra/10363/2019-20 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi u/s. 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), wherein the ld. CIT(Appeals) confirmed the addition made by the learned Assessing Officer.
Brief facts state that the appellant/assessee is a non-filer. Based on the information in possession of the Assessing Officer that the appellant/assessee had deposited cash of Rs.26,17,600/- in his saving bank account maintained with Punjab National Bank, Firozabad during the year under consideration, the Assessing Officer initiated reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act by issuing a notice u/s. 148 of the Act. The assessee did not file any return of income in pursuance of this notice.
Statutory notices were issued which too remained un-responded.
Therefore, the Assessing Officer made addition of the aforesaid cash deposit amounting to Rs.26,17,600/- in the hands of assessee as income from undisclosed sources, vide assessment order dated 03.11.2019 u/s. 144/147 of the Act.
Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(Appeals) who confirmed the addition made by the learned Assessing Officer and dismissed assessee’s first appeal.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee. However, an adjournment application was placed on record, which was rejected. We have perused the records and heard the learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue who supported the impugned order.
It transpires from the perusal of records that the assessee did not respond to various notices issued by the learned Assessing Officer, which he stated in the grounds of this appeal to have been issued at wrong address. We notice that the assessee did not respond to the notices issued 2 | P a g e by the first appellate authority on 11.01.2021, 20.09.2023, 14.11.2023 and 26.12.2023. It is however noticed that learned CIT(Appeals) passed ex- parte impugned order without any 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 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. 11.01.2024 is set aside.
Order pronounced in the open court on 02.04.2025.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Utkal Suppliers,Ganjam vs. Assistant Commissioner Of CT And GST, Ganjam-I Circle,GanjamOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of Hte Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Govindjee Dairy Milk Private Limited vs. Central Goods And Services TaxRajasthan · 27 Oct 2026