Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte for want of prosecution because notices were sent to an incorrect email address. The assessee contended that they were unaware of the proceedings until the order was later made available. The appeal before the ITAT was filed with a delay.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without considering the merits of the case. Considering the circumstances, including the delay in filing the appeal due to communication issues, the Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without deciding the appeal on merits and whether the matter should be remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
68, 115BBE
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT BENCH, SURAT
Before: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth
Year : 2017-18 Kanan Anilkumar Patel The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ 92, Bhaganagar Society Ward-2(3)(2) v/s. Near Gautam Park Surat – 395 001 Amroli Sayan Road Surat – 394 107 "थायी लेखा सं./PAN: ARGPP 6569 E (अपीलाथ(/ Appellant) (!) यथ(/ Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Ajay Uke, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 19/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 17/02/2026 आदेश/O R D E R
Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] dated 09/10/2023 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), NFAC has erred in passing ex-parte order without giving finding on merits of the case.
2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC has erred in confirming the action of Kanan Anilkumar Patel vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2017-18 2 assessing officer in making addition Rs. 27,40,000/-u/s 68 as unexplained cash credit.
3. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), NFAC has erred in confirming the action of assessing officer in invoking provisions of section 115BBE of the I.T. act and levying surcharge @25% which is not applicable on above addition.
4. It is therefore prayed that above addition made by assessing officer and confirmed by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) may please be deleted.
5. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal.”
3. The appeal of the assessee is time-barred by approximately 8 months, however, no note has been put by the Registry in this respect. A separate application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal has been filed, wherein, it has been pleaded that the Ld. CIT(A) sent the notices on a different email and not at the email mentioned by the assessee in appeal form No.35, resulting into passing of the ex-parte order by the Ld. CIT(A). It has also been submitted that even the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) was not available on income-tax Portal. The assessee had filed grievance petition, in this respect and, thereafter, the copy of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) was made available to the assessee. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has further brought our attention to the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) to show that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee for want of prosecution without giving any finding on merits. He, therefore, has submitted that the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for decision of the appeal of the assessee on merits.
The Ld. DR could not rebut the aforesaid factual position on record.
Considering the rival submissions, in our view, the interests of justice will be well-served if the assessee be given an opportunity to present his case Kanan Anilkumar Patel vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2017-18 3 before the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is hereby set aside and matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the appeal of the assessee afresh on merits. The Ld. CIT(A) will give an opportunity to the assessee to present his case and furnish the necessary details and evidences. The Ld. CIT(A), if so require, may call upon the remand report from the AO. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(A) will decide the appeal of the assessee in accordance with law. The assessee will remain vigilant and promptly respond to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) and furnish the necessary details and evidences before the Ld. CIT(A).
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.