Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's income tax return for AY 2017-18 was selected for scrutiny due to a large deduction claimed under Section 57. The assessment was completed under Section 143(3), assessing the total income at Rs. 41,39,653. The assessee's first appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) despite multiple opportunities for hearing.
Held
The tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had provided numerous opportunities to the assessee. However, considering the voluminous documents and in the interest of justice, the tribunal remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment on merits, ensuring compliance with natural justice principles.
Key Issues
The key legal issue was whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the assessee's appeal ex-parte, and if the principles of natural justice were violated, warranting a fresh assessment.
Sections Cited
Section 57, 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 28.11.2025 passed in appeal No CIT(APPEALS) 1, AGRA/10558/2019-20 by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (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 has dismissed assessee’s appeal ex-parte.
Briefly stating assessee e-filed its return of income for A.Y. 2017-18 on 30.03.2018, declaring its income at nil. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS on the ground of large deduction claimed u/s. 57 of the Act. Statutory notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) were issued and served upon the assessee. The assessee submitted its reply during the assessment proceedings. After considering assessee’s response assessment was completed u/s. 143(3), vide assessment order dated 23.12.2019, assessing assessee’s total income at Rs. 41,39,653.
The aggrieved assessee preferred first appeal, which was dismissed ex-parte.
Assessee has approached this tribunal on the ground that ld CIT(A) had erred in confirming the said additions made by the assessing officer in violation of the principles of natural justice.
The Adjournment application moved on behalf of the assessee stood rejected. Heard ld representative for the appellant assessee and ld representative for the respondent revenue.
We notice that ld CIT(A) has afforded various opportunities of hearing to the assessee on 31.12.2020, 17.01.2024, 05.02.2024, 02.04.2024, 29.01.2025, 04.03.2025 and 02.09.2025. However, assessee made no submissions with specific details during the first appellate proceedings. Ld CIT(A) was thus compelled to decide the appeal ex-parte. In view of the required verification of the voluminous documents filed before the ld CIT(A) and in the interest of justice, we deem it just and proper to afford assessee an opportunity of hearing before the ld A.O. We, therefore, remit the matter back to the file of learned A.O. for passing order afresh on merit 2 | P a g e in accordance with law. Needless to say that the Assessing Officer shall ensure the substantial compliance of the principles of natural justice.
The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.