Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed a return declaring Rs. 1,70,500. The Assessing Officer initiated reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, after noticing a cash deposit of Rs. 10,67,965/- in the assessee's bank account. The AO added this amount to the assessee's income, which was confirmed by the CIT(Appeals).
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not respond to notices from the AO and the CIT(Appeals), citing ill health. However, the CIT(Appeals) passed an ex-parte order without discussing the merits. Therefore, the Tribunal remitted the matter back to the CIT(Appeals) for adjudication on merits, emphasizing adherence to natural justice.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in passing an ex-parte order without considering the merits of the case and whether the assessee's non-compliance with notices was sufficiently justified.
Sections Cited
147, 148, 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 BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH
ORDER
Per Sunil Kumar Singh, Judicial Member:
This appeal has been preferred by assessee against the impugned order dated 22.12.2023 passed in Appeal No.CIT(Appeal)-2, Agra/10477/2019-20 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) dismissed the first appeal of the assessee and confirmed the addition made by the learned Assessing Officer.
Brief facts state that the assessee filed his return of income on 29.06.2012 declaring income of Rs.1,70,500/-. Based on the information in possession of the Assessing Officer that the appellant/assessee had deposited cash of Rs.10,67,965/- in his saving bank account maintained with State Bank of India, Shamsabad, Agra, the Assessing Officer initiated reassessment proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act by issuing a notice u/s. 148 of the Act on 31.03.2019, which stood un-responded on behalf of the assessee.
Statutory notices were issued, which too were not complied with. Therefore, the Assessing Officer made addition of aforesaid cash deposit amounting to Rs.10,67,965/- to the income of the assessee, assessing total income of the assessee at Rs.12,38,465/- vide assessment order dated 06.11.2019 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 state of facts mentioned in the impugned order that the non- compliance of such notices was due to his ill health since July, 2019. We notice that the assessee did not respond to the notices issued by the first 2 | P a g e appellate authority on 14.01.2021, 04.11.2022, 12.07.2023, 28.07.2023, 14.08.2023 and 16.11.2023. 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 dated 22.12.2023 is set aside.
Order pronounced in the open court on 01.04.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 01.04.2025 *aks/-
3 | P a g e