Loading judgment…
Facts
An assessment order u/s 147/143(3) added Rs. 31,16,000 for undisclosed cash deposits. The assessee's appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed. Both the assessment order and the CIT(A)'s order were passed ex-parte, without the assessee's participation.
Held
The Tribunal found that both the assessment and first appellate orders were ex-parte and the CIT(A) had not decided the appeal on merits. In the interest of justice, the issue was restored to the Assessing Officer for a de-novo assessment, with directions for both parties to participate.
Key Issues
The key legal issue was the validity of ex-parte assessment and first appellate orders, specifically concerning the violation of principles of natural justice due to the assessee's non-participation and the CIT(A)'s failure to decide on the grounds of appeal.
Sections Cited
Section 147, Section 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN BENCH, ‘SMC’ DEHRADUN
( A.Y 2015-16) Kamla Gairola Vs Income Tax Officer, C-53, AkashrdhamTenaments Ward 1(1) (4), Room No. A-21, NR Mathuranagari OP Road, 1st Floor, Annexes Building 13- Vadodara, Gujarat, 390020 A, Subhash Road, Dehradun, PAN: AOFPG4324J Uttarakhand (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Rajiv Sharma, Adv Respondent by Sh. Akash Barnwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 07.04.2026 Date of Pronouncement 15.04.2026 ORDER
PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM:
The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), ADDL/JCIT(A) Mysore (‘Ld.
CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), dated 19/12/2025 for the Assessment Year 2015-16.
Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 01/12/2018 u/s 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making addition of Rs. 31,16,000/- on account of cash deposited in the bank account out of undisclosed source of income.
Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) which has been dismissed on 19/12/2025 vide order impugned. As against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 19/12/2025, Assessee preferred the present Appeal.
The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that both the order of the A.O. as well as Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte and the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided on the grounds of the Appeal of the Assessee and the order impugned came to be passed in violation of principals of natural justice.
Thus, sought for allowing the Appeal.
Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that the Assessee is a chronic defaulter who has not appeared before the Lower Authorities, therefore, both the A.O. as well as the Ld. CIT(A) have passed the respective orders in accordance with law which requires no interference, thus by relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities sought for dismissal of the Appeal.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. Both the order of the A.O. as well as order of the Ld. CIT(A) are ex-parte, wherein the Assessee has not participated in any of the proceedings. Even the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided all the grounds of Appeal on its merits. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to restore the issue to the file of the A.O. for de-novo assessment. Needless to say, the A.O. shall provide opportunity of being heard to the Assessee before passing the assessment orderin accordance with law. The Assessee is also directed to participate in assessment proceedings without fail.
10. In the result, the Appeal of the Appellant is partly allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on this 15th Day of April, 2026