Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed a return of income, which was later selected for scrutiny. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment, making additions to the declared income. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A), who partly allowed the appeal, confirming some additions and deleting others.
Held
The tribunal noted that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order after the assessee repeatedly sought adjournments instead of making submissions. To ensure natural justice, the tribunal remitted the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on merits after providing the assessee an opportunity of hearing.
Key Issues
The key legal issue was whether the CIT(A) was justified in passing an ex-parte order when the assessee repeatedly sought adjournments, and if the assessee should be granted another opportunity for hearing.
Sections Cited
Section 143(1), Section 143(2), Section 142(1), Section 143(3), Section 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AGRA (DB
Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH
ORDER This appeal has been preferred against the impugned order dated 24.09.2025 passed in appeal No CIT (Appeal) 2, Agra/10541/2019-20 by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “CIT(A) u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for the A.Y. 2017-18, wherein ld CIT(A) has partly allowed assessee’s appeal, confirming part of the additions and deleting in part.
The brief facts state that the assessee filed return of income, declaring total income of Rs. 77,20,890 on 31.03.2018. The return was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act. Later on, the return was selected for scrutiny through (CASS). Statutory notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued and served upon the assessee. Assessee’s representative filed reply alongwith the documentary evidence before the A.O. After considering assessee’s response, ld A.O. completed the assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act and assessed total income at Rs. 2,74,46,240/- vide order dated 31.12.2019.
Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal against the assessment order before ld CIT(A), who partly allowed assessee’s appeal as stated in above terms.
Appellant assessee has approached this tribunal on the ground that ld CIT(A) has erred in confirming the part of said additions ex-parte.
Perused the records. Assessee’s prayer for adjournment was rejected. Heard ld representative for the assessee and ld. Sr. DR for the respondent.
We notice that ld CIT(A) issued notices on 29.01.2021, 22.05.2025, 04.06.2025, 13.06.2025, 02.07.2025 and 14.07.2025 to the assessee for making submissions. Assessee, instead of making required submissions, kept on moving adjournments on all above dates fixed for compliance. Assessee also filed adjournments on 10.09.2025, which was rejected by the ld CIT(A) and passed ex-parte impugned order. In the interest of 2 | P a g e justice, we deem it just and proper to affrord an opportunity of hearing to the assessee before ld CIT(A). We, therefore, remit the matter back to the file of ld CIT(A), who shall pass order on merit afresh in accordance with law. Needless to say that ld CIT(A) shall ensure the substantial compliance of the principles of natural justice. The appeal is liable to be allowed for statistical purposes.