What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT found that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without deciding on merits, considering the Covid-19 pandemic period and the assessee being a society. The case was remitted back to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits.

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) which was dismissed for non-prosecution due to non-compliance with notices. The assessee did not appear at the ITAT hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without considering the merits, especially during the pandemic period.

Shri Digamber Jain… vs ITO | ITAT Indore 2022

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: MS. MADHUMITA ROY & SHRI B.M. BIYANI

For Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR

Hearing: 12.09.2022Pronounced: 15.09.2022

Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 22.03.2022 passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”], which in turn arises out of intimation of assessment dated 25.06.2019 passed by Ld. CPC, Bengaluru [“Ld. AO”] u/s 143(1) of Income- tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment Year [“AY”] 2018-19, the assessee has filed this appeal.

At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of assessee. However, Ld. DR was ready to argue the matter. Considering the nature of grievance,

Shri Digamber Jain Siddhashetra Sidhwerkut Trust A.Y. 2018-19 the appeal was proceeded with for hearing ex-parte qua the assessee, on the basis of material held on record and submission of Ld. DR.

Heard Ld. DR and perused the case record.

On perusal of appeal-order passed by Ld. CIT(A), it is observed that the Ld. CIT(A) had given notices dated 19.02.2021, 13.12.2021, 21.12.2021 and 29.12.2021 which remained un-complied with by assessee. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed appeal for the reason of non-prosecution by assessee.

It is further observed that (i) the assessee is a society; (ii) the appeal- proceeding had been conducted by Ld. CIT(A) under faceless scheme; (iii) the relevant period was a Covid-19 pandemic period; and (iv) the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in limine without disposing off the same on merit. Having regard to all factors and to meet the end of justice, we are of the view that it would be just and fair to remit this case back to Ld. CIT(A) to enable the assessee to submit replies so that the Ld. CIT(E) can decide the issues on merit in accordance with law. The Ld. CIT(E) shall give adequate opportunities to the assessee to submit details / documents. The assessee is also directed to represent its case on the hearings fixed by Ld. CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments. Ordered accordingly.

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced as per Rule 34 of I.T.A.T. Rules 1963 on 15.09.2022.

SHRI DIGAMBER JAIN SIDDHASHETRASIDHWERKUT TRUST,SIDDHAWAR KOOT,OMKARESHWAR vs. ITO-KHARGONE, DCIT CPC BENGALURU, KHARGONE

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments