Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2013-14 was against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) under Section 250, which arose from an assessment order under Section 147 read with Section 144. The assessee contended that they could not represent their case before the CIT(A) due to non-service of notices and sought to submit additional documents.
Held
The tribunal noted that the CIT(A)'s order was ex-parte and non-speaking, violating principles of natural justice. It restored the matter back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, directing that the assessee be given a sufficient opportunity of being heard and a speaking order be passed on merits.
Key Issues
The key legal issue was whether the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) violated principles of natural justice, as the assessee claimed non-receipt of notices and lack of opportunity to present their case.
Sections Cited
Section 250, Section 147, Section 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”
Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI
ORDER Per.Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Accountant Member: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2013- 14, is directed against the order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), dated 09.07.2024, which in turn arises out of an order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 read with section 144 of the Act, on 30.03.2022.
At the outset itself, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee assailed the impugned order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and the order being an ex-parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of principle Mahesh Ratan Chudasama of natural justice. The Ld. Counsel submitted that assessee wants to submit some additional documents and evidences before CIT(A), therefore, matter may be restored back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Hence, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee, prayed the Bench that now the assessee wants to submit some additional documents and evidences before Ld. CIT(A), therefore, matter may be restored back to the file of the learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee could not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) as the notices were not served on the assessee, however, there was compliance before the assessing officer.
On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue, did not have any objection, if the matter is restored back to the file of the learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
I have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld CIT(A) and other materials brought on record. I note that in the assessee’s case under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s 147 read with section 143(3) of the Act and the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex-parte order and non- speaking order, therefore, I do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee.
Considering the above facts, I note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A). I note that the ld. CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits based on the material available before him hence it is a violation of principle of natural justice. I note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to Mahesh Ratan Chudasama contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, I restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, I deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced in the open court on /01/2026