Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) for non-prosecution. The assessee sought an adjournment, but thereafter did not respond to notices or provide submissions. The ITAT noted that the assessee had not filed any submissions before the CIT(A).
Held
The Tribunal held that the assessee appeared to have lost interest in pursuing the appeal, as evidenced by their conduct. However, considering the prayer for one more opportunity, the appeal was restored to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte order of CIT(A) dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution was justified, and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case.
Sections Cited
IT Act sections
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC’’ JAIPUR
Before: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAINvk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 112/JP/2024
Shri Riyaz Ahmed cuke The ITO Vs. 25243, Babu Ka Tiba Ward 2(1) Ramganj Anaj Mandi, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABSPA 0422 B vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Ashok Gupta, Adv jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 18/03/2024 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 27/03/2024 vkns'k@ORDER PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 08-12-2023, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ hereinafter referred to as (NFAC) ] for the assessment year 2016-17 raising grounds of appeal at Form No. 36. 2.1 At the outset of the hearing, the Bench noted that the ld. CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order by dismissing the appeal of the assessee and the narration as mentioned therein are as under:-
2 RIYAZ AHMED VS ITO, WARD 2(1), JAIPUR ‘’2. During the appellate proceedings, notice for hearing was issued on 13-01-2021, 01-11-2023, 2-11-2023 and 01-12-2023 for furnishing written submissions and other relevant documents in support to grounds of appeal and facts of the case. However, the appellant sought adjournment on 25-02-2021 only. Thereafter, the appellant was provided sufficient time and ample opportunities but he neither respond to the said notices nor sought any adjournment.
3. From the above conduct of the appellant, it is evident that the appellant is no more interested in pursuing its appeal. The Hon’ble Supreme in the case of CIT vs B.N. Bhattacharjee & Others [1979] 10 CTR 354 (SC) observed that an appeal, means effectively pursuing it. The Hon’ble M.P. High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs CWT [1977] 223 ITR 480 (MP) dismissed the reference filed at the instance of the assesee for default and for not taking necessary steps. Considering the conduct of the assessee in the present circumstances, I am of the view that the appellant is not interested in pursuing the appeal. This view has been affirmed by the ITAT Delhi Bench in the caseof CIT vs the appeal filed by the assesse for want of persuasion. Under these circumstances, the present appeal of the appellant is liabkle to be dismissed.
4. Since there is no submission or material available on record relating to merit and in support of grounds of appeal, no decision is being rendered on merit.
5. In the result, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed.’’ 2.2 After hearing both the parties and perusing the materials available on record, it is noted that the assessee has not filed any submissions and evidences relating to the case before the ld. CIT(A) and thus the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal with following narration’
3 RIYAZ AHMED VS ITO, WARD 2(1), JAIPUR ‘’4. Since there is no submission or material available on record relating to merit and in support of grounds of appeal
, no decision is being rendered on merit.
5. In the result, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed.’’ It is also noted that the ld. AR of the assessee prayed for one more chance to contest the case before the ld.CIT(A) while as the ld. DR relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A). The Bench feels that one more chance may be given to the Assessee to contest the case before the ld.CIT(A) and the appeal is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for afresh adjudication and the assessee will submit the necessary documents / evidences concerning the above mentioned appeal. However, for lethargic and negligent action on the part of the assessee, therefore a cost of Rs.2,000/- is imposed upon the assessee and the same shall be deposited in the Prime Minister Relief Fund and copy of the same shall be submitted to the ld CIT(A) for proof and thus the appeal of the assessee is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide it afresh by providing one more opportunity of hearing, however, the assessee will not seek any adjournment on frivolous ground and remain cooperative during the course of proceedings. Thus the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 2.3 Before parting, we may make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any