Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad
Before: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-
Per Vijay Pal Rao, Vice President
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated, 29/07/2024 of the learned CIT (A)- NFAC Delhi, relating to A.Y.2020-21.
The assessee has raised the following grounds:
Page 1 of 6 Page 2 of 6 Page 3 of 6
At the time of hearing, the learned AR of the assessee has submitted that the learned CIT (A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte for want of prosecution and, therefore, the appeal of the assessee has not been decided on merits. He has referred to the show cause notice issued by the learned CIT (A) dated, 22/07/2024 and submitted that, the assessee has duly filed the reply to the said show cause notice, vide letter dated 29/07/2024 placed at page No.90 of the paper book. Thus, the assessee duly complied with the notices issued by the learned CIT (A). The assessee also filed the relevant details and documentary evidences, as evident from the reply and annexures/attachment sent electronically. The learned CIT (A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution, without considering the reply filed by the assessee. He has also pointed out that, the assessee has now filed additional evidence placed at page Nos. 173 & 174
Page 4 of 6 of the Paper Book, which is also required to be considered while deciding the issues involved in the appeal. Thus, he has pleaded that the impugned order of the learned CIT (A) may be set aside and the matter may be remanded to the record of the learned CIT (A) for fresh adjudication on merits.
On the other hand, the learned DR has raised no serious objection, if the matter is remanded to the record of the learned CIT (A) for fresh adjudication on merits.
We have considered the rival submission as well as the relevant material available on record. The learned CIT (A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution, as stated in para 5 of the impugned order, as under:
Though the learned CIT (A) has given the details of the various notices issued to the assessee and recorded that that, the assessee sought adjournment on each and every date of hearing. However, we find that, in response to the notice dated 22/07/2024, the assessee has filed the reply within the stipulated period i.e. 29/07/2024 placed at page Nos. 92 & 93 of the paper book. It is manifest from the reply filed by the assessee that, the assessee along with the written submission, also filed an application for admission of additional ground and additional
Page 5 of 6 evidences, which were also attached to the reply. It is evident that, the learned CIT (A) has dismissed the appeal while passing the impugned order, without considering the reply filed by the assessee. Thus, the impugned order passed by the learned CIT (A) is not in accordance with the provisions of section 250(5) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order of the learned CIT (A) is set aside and the matter is remanded to the record of the learned CIT (A) for fresh adjudication on merits. It is clarified that the additional grounds as well as the additional evidence filed by the assessee shall also to be considered, before passing the fresh order after giving proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee.