What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT held that the CIT(A) order was not in accordance with Section 250(6) of the Act as it did not decide the grounds on merits. Therefore, the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed for non-prosecution and lack of details, despite multiple opportunities for hearing. The assessee then appealed this dismissal to the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without deciding on merits is valid. Whether the assessee was provided a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

Jwal Singh Parmar, Shajapur vs ITO | ITAT Indore 2023

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

For Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR

Hearing: 21.09.2023Pronounced: 22.09.2023

This appeal by the Assesse is directed against order dated 16.03.2023 of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for A.Y.2011-12. The assesse has raised following grounds of appeal:

“GROUND NO.01: That on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the order passed by Ld. (CIT(A)) is invalid and unjustified as the order has been passed ex parte and the appellant has not received reasonable opportunity of being heard before passing of the order.

Jwal Singh Parmar Page 2 of 3 GROUND NO.02: That the Ld.(CIT(A)) erred in not holding that the notice u/s 148 And order u/s 143(3)/147 passed by the LD. A.O SHAJAPUR are wrong, invalid and unjustified.

GROUND NO.03: That the LD. (CIT(A)) erred in not holding that the addition of Rs. 11,68,000/- made (as an undisclosed income) to the returned total Income of the applicant is wrong invalid unjustified.”

None has appeared on behalf of the assessee when this appeal was called for hearing. The assesse has filed a request for adjournment of hearing however, the appeal of the assesse has been dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) for non-prosecution therefore, the bench proposes to hear and disposed of this appeal ex-parte.

We have heard Ld. DR and carefully perused the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee summarily in para 4 as under:

“During the appeal proceedings, the assessee was provided an opportunity of being heard on 03.02.2021, 02.12.2021, 11.01.2022 and 09.05.2022 however, no details are filed despite the fact that notices were duly served. The approach of the assessee amply shows that it is not interested in prosecuting the appeal. Therefore, having considered the entire facts of the case and evidence available on record, the appeal so filed is dismissed.”

Thus, it is clear that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed for non-prosecution and for want of details and submission on behalf of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) has not decided the grounds of appeal on merits by speaking order and therefore, the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is not in accordance with the provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. Accordingly in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the record of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits after giving one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Page 2 of 3

Jwal Singh Parmar Page 3 of 3 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 22 .09.2023

JWAL SINGH PARMAR,SHAJAPUR vs. THE ITO , SHAJAPUR

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