What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that the CIT(A)'s order was not in compliance with Section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a proper adjudication.

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) against the assessment order. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to non-prosecution by the assessee, without complying with the statutory requirements.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution was passed in compliance with Section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act.

Arun Kumar Shukla, Harda vs ITO | ITAT Indore 2023

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRIB.M. BIYANI

For Appellant: Shri Arpit Gaur, CA

For Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal

Hearing: 21.06.2023Pronounced: 23.06.2023

आदेश/O R D E R

Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:

Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 13.06.2022passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”], which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 21.12.2019 passed by learned ITO, Ward-1, Harda [“Ld. AO”] u/s 143(3) of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2017-18, the assessee has filed this appeal.

Heard the learned Representatives of both sides and case-records perused.

Shri Arun Kumar Shukla Assessment year 2017-18 3. Section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 provides “The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision.”. We observe that in the present case, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal, although due to non-prosecution by assessee on the dates of hearing fixed by Ld. CIT(A), but still without complying with the mandate of section 250(6). Therefore, the impugned first appeal-order passed by Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be set aside and the matter is fit for remand to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for a proper adjudication. Ld. DR fairly agrees to this but prays to direct the assessee to represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments. In view of this and also having regard to the principle of natural justice and fair play, we deem it fit to give one more opportunity to assessee so that the assessee can represent his case before CIT(A) for a proper adjudication. Accordingly, we remand this matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication after giving opportunity of hearing to assessee. The assessee is also directed to ensure participation in the hearings fixed by Ld. CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments.

Resultantly, this appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 23.06.2023.

ARUN KUMAR SHUKLA,HARDA vs. THE ITO-1 , HARDA

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