2023 (2) TMI 1308 - HC - Income Tax

Dismissal of appeal by CIT(A) for non-prosecution - AO made additions for loans advances, unconfirmed sundry creditors and TDS deducted from payment of commission and expenditure not vouched - HELD THAT - CIT (A) has not decided the case on merits but dismissed the same for non-prosecution. As per section 251 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, ld. CIT(A) is duty bound to decide the case on merits and not dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. In these circumstances, we remit the appeal to ld. CIT (A). Ld. CIT (A) is directed to pass proper speaking order on merits of the case. Needless to add, assessee should be given adequate opportunity of being heard. Appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against assessment order for assessment year 2012-13 dismissed for non-prosecution without deciding on merits.

Analysis:
The appeal before the High Court arose from an assessment order for the assessment year 2012-13, where the Assessing Officer (AO) had made additions for loans & advances, unconfirmed sundry creditors, TDS deducted from commission payment, and expenditure not vouched. The appellant raised grounds challenging the assessment order, claiming it to be arbitrary, erroneous, devoid of jurisdiction, and illegal. The appellant also contested the disallowance of expenses and the directions for interest and penalty proceedings. The appeal was initially filed before the ld. CIT (A), who dismissed it for non-prosecution without delving into the merits of the case. The appellant then appealed before the High Court, arguing that the CIT (A) was duty-bound to decide the case on its merits and not dismiss it for non-prosecution. The High Court agreed with the appellant, noting that the CIT (A) should have decided the case on its merits and remitted the appeal back to the CIT (A) for a proper speaking order on the case's merits, ensuring the appellant's right to be heard. Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, emphasizing the importance of deciding cases on their merits rather than dismissing them for procedural reasons.

This judgment highlights the significance of adjudicating appeals on their merits and ensuring that parties are given a fair opportunity to present their case. The High Court's decision underscores the principle that cases should not be dismissed for non-prosecution without a proper examination of the substantive issues involved. The judgment serves as a reminder of the procedural obligations of adjudicating authorities to provide a reasoned decision based on the facts and legal arguments presented before them.