Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC for Assessment Year 2015-16. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal ex-parte without adjudicating on the merits.
Held
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had decided the issue ex-parte without considering the merits. In the interest of natural justice, the Tribunal remanded the issue back to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits after giving the assessee an adequate opportunity of being heard.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without adjudicating on merits, violating principles of natural justice.
Sections Cited
68
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH,‘C’: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER
Date of Hearing 19.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 19.11.2025 ORDER PER KRINWANT SAHAY, AM,
Appeal in this case has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 06.03.2025 of the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, New Delhi, for Assessment Year 2015-16.
The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-
1. That in any case and in any view of the matter, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal in limine by upholding the Assessment Order of the Ld. AO.
2. That in any case and in any view of the matter, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in dismissing the Appeal without making a speaking order on the merits of the case.
3. That in any case and in any view of the matter, the Learned CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in upholding the Assessment Order of the Learned AO when no books of accounts were maintained and also produced and the additions have been made on the basis of the pass book of the bank, which is not a book of account of the Appellant.
4. That in any case and in any view of the matter, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in upholding the addition of Rs.1,33,58,229 to the returned income disregarding the opening balance of the Capital Account as on the first day of the Financial Year under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
5. That in any case and in any view of the matter, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in upholding the Assessment Order passed by the Ld. AO with respect to addition of Rs.53,00,000 to the returned income on account of refund of loan given in earlier years under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
6. That in any case and in any view of the matter, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the Assessment Order when Rs.53,00,000 as included in the opening capital was added second time on receipt of refund of loan during the Financial Year.
That in any case and in any view of the matter, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the Assessment Order with respect to deposit of cash in bank account of Rs.33,588 alleged to be out of unexplained cash sources.
At the very outset, it was brought to the notice of the Bench that there was no compliance made before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, the ld. CIT(A) has passed the order ex-parte.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee.
Per contra, ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below.
We have considered the findings given by the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A), we find that the ld CIT(A) had decided the issue ex parte without adjudicating the issue on merits. Keeping in view, the elements of natural justice, we are inclined to remand this issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to give adequate opportunity to the assessee of being heard and pass an order on merits. Accordingly, the appeal is remanded back to the file of the ld. CIT(A).
7 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 19th November, 2025.