SHRI RAJ KUMAR,ABOHAR vs. ASSISTANT COMISSIOER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without deciding the appeal on merits, ignoring the assessee's submissions and violating principles of natural justice. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte due to alleged negligence in pursuing the appeal. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) failed to consider submissions and violated principles of natural justice by not issuing a show cause notice.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without deciding on merits and violating principles of natural justice. Whether the AO properly invoked Sections 69A and 68.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE
The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 16.03.2023 in respect of Assessment Year 2018-19. to be condoned and to allow the appeal on merits. The ld. DR has no objection to the request of condonation of short delay in filing the appeal.
Accordingly, the short delay of 4 days is condoned and appeal is admitted on merits.
At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has passed the order ex-parte qua the assessee merely stating vide para 5.3 that the appellant has been offered sufficient and reasonable opportunity to present his case. However, the appellant has been negligent to pursue this appeal. The counsel further submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has upheld the finding of the Assessing Officer without considering the details submission filed before the AO (APB Pg. 1 to 35). The counsel argued that the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A) in arbitrary manner while upholding the validity of the assessment order particularly when the ld. AO failed to discharge mandatory and legal requirement for invoking provisions of section 69A and 68 of the Act. He further argued that the ld. CIT(A) has not even issued show cause notice for taking adverse view against the appellant assessee is violation of principles of natural justice. Accordingly, he pleaded that the matter may be remanded back to the file of the ld. the fact that the assessee being illiterate and had no means and knowledge and had not access to electronic communication mode. In support he placed reliance on the case law on the issue that lack of knowledge of electronic services of notice is a sufficient cause, for non compliance as under:
“That Delhi Bench of the Hon’ble ITAT in the case of Egis international S.A. vs. ACIT (ITA No. 1663/Del/2021) A.Y. 2016-17, vide order Dt. 03.08.2023, while dealing with the identical facts has restored the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) NFAC for de novo adjudication on merits after allowing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee because it was brought on record before the Hon’ble Bench that the notices sent to the e-mail of the employee did not reach the assessee and the non-compliance was not deliberate.”
Per contra, the ld. DR supported the impugned order, contending that the sufficient opportunities of hearing have been granted to the appellant assessee. However, he has no objection in restoring the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to grant one more opportunity in view of principles of natural justice. :
We have heard both the sides and perused the material on record and the impugned order. Admittedly, the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order ex-parte qua the assessee by merely stating that the appellant has granted sufficient and reasonable opportunity to represent his before him. Thus, the ld. CIT(A) has rejected the appeal of the appellant assessee in limine without deciding the matter on merits of the case particularly ignoring the submissions filed before the Assessing Officer (APB Pg. 1 to 35) in view of principles of natural justice. We consider it deem fit to remand the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the matter afresh on the issues raised by the appellant assessee after granting sufficient opportunity of being heard and considering the material evidence filed on record and to be filed in the course of afresh proceedings.
At the same time, the appellant assessee is directed to cooperate in the fresh proceedings by attending and filing the requisite information in compliance to the queries raised by the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the matter is remanded back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication as per law.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
More judgments on Section 69A
- Vishal Kumar Patel(HUF), Raipur vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), RaipurITA 595/RPR/2026[2017-18]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Gujarat Co-Operative Milk Marketing Federation Limited vs. Union Of INDIAGujarat · 14 Oct 2026
- Ramesh K Devadiga vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co Operative Housing Society LTDBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Ramesh K Devadiga And Ors vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co-Operative Housing Society LTD And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Permender Singh vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Abdhish Dhal Samanta, Bhubaneswar vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026