Loading judgment…
Facts
The Assessee filed multiple appeals against the orders of the CIT(A)/NFAC for Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13, and 2017-18, where both quantum and penalty appeals were dismissed. The Assessee contended that these appeals were dismissed ex-parte, without a hearing and without addressing the grounds of appeal on merits.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the Ld. CIT(A) had indeed passed the impugned orders ex-parte without providing an opportunity of hearing or dealing with the appeals on merits, which constitutes a violation of principles of natural justice. Consequently, the Tribunal remanded the matter back to the Ld. CIT(A) with directions to decide the appeals afresh on merits after granting the Assessee a proper opportunity of being heard.
Key Issues
Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the assessee's quantum and penalty appeals ex-parte without providing an opportunity of hearing or deciding on merits, in violation of principles of natural justice.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI
Before: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA
ORDER PER BENCH: The captioned appeals in 2655/Del/2024 and 2600/Del/2024 are filed by the Assessee challenging the orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 28/03/2024 pertaining to Assessment Years 2011-12, and 2012- 13and 2017-18, wherein the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the quantum Appeals filed by the Assessee. and 2654/Del/2024 are filed by the Assessee challenging the orders of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 28/03/2024 pertaining to Assessment Years 2011-12, and 2012-13, wherein the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the penalty Appeals filed by the Assessee.
The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee vehemently submitted that all the First Appeals filed by the Assessee challenging both quantum as well as penalty have been dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) without hearing the Assessee which is in violation of principals of natural justice. Further submitted that while deciding the first appeal without dealt all the grounds of Appeal of the Assessee and in a cryptic manner the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the orders impugned. Thus, sought for allowing the Appeals.
4. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative relying on the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) sought for dismissal of the Appeal.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It can be seen from the order of the Ld. CIT(A) , the impugned orders have been passed ex-parte without hearing the Assessee. It is further observed that while deciding the First Appeals, the Ld. CIT(A) has not dealt with all the grounds of Appeals of the Assessee on merits.
Considering the facts that the Assessee has not participated in the first Appellate proceedings, in the interest of natural justice, we remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the Frist Appeals afresh on merits in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee.
In the result, the Appeals of the Assessee in (A.Y. 2011-12), (A.Y. 2012- (A.Y. 2012-13)are partly allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 19th September, 2025