2021 (2) TMI 600 - AT - Income Tax

Order passed by the CIT(A) ex-parte - Order passed by the ld. CIT(A) dismissing the appeal of the assessee for non prosecution without giving proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard - sufficient cause for non compliance to the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A) fixing the appeal for hearing from time to time - HELD THAT - As per specific provisions contained in sub-section (6) of section 250 of the Act, the ld. CIT(A) was required to dispose of the appeal of assessee by an order in writing stating therein the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for the decision. A perusal of the impugned order passed by the CIT(A) clearly shows that the same does not comply with these mandatory requirements. Even the ld. DR has not disputed this position and submitted the matter may be sent back to the ld. CIT(A) for disposing of the appeal of the assessee afresh on merits after giving proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard. The impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A) ex-parte dismissing the appeal of the assessee for non prosecution is accordingly set aside and the matter is remitted back to him for disposing of the appeal of assessee afresh on merits in accordance with the law after giving the assessee a proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to make due compliance before the ld. CIT(A) and extend all the possible cooperation in order to enable the ld. CIT(A) to dispose of the appeal afresh on merits expeditiously. Appeal of assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

Summary

Issues:
1. Dismissal of appeal by Ld.CIT(A) for non-prosecution without proper opportunity.
2. Compliance with mandatory requirements under section 250 of the Income-tax Act.
3. Remittance of the matter back to Ld.CIT(A) for fresh disposal of the appeal.

Issue 1: Dismissal of appeal for non-prosecution
The appeal filed by the assessee was directed against the order of Ld.CIT(A)-1, Nashik, dated 02.12.2019, which was passed ex-parte, leading to the dismissal of the appeal for non-prosecution. The assessee challenged this dismissal on the grounds of not being given proper and sufficient opportunity to be heard. The Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without delving into the merits of the case, which was a violation of the mandatory requirements under the law.

Issue 2: Compliance with mandatory requirements
The order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) did not comply with the necessary provisions outlined in sub-section (6) of section 250 of the Income-tax Act. It lacked the essential elements such as points for determination, decision thereon, and reasons for the decision. The non-compliance with these requirements was acknowledged even by the Ld. DR. Consequently, the matter was deemed to be sent back to the Ld.CIT(A) for a fresh disposal of the appeal, ensuring proper compliance with the legal provisions.

Issue 3: Remittance of the matter for fresh disposal
The appellate tribunal set aside the ex-parte order of dismissal by Ld.CIT(A) and remitted the matter back to him for a fresh disposal of the appeal on its merits. The Ld.CIT(A) was directed to provide the assessee with a proper and sufficient opportunity to be heard. The assessee was instructed to comply with the requirements and extend full cooperation to facilitate the expeditious disposal of the appeal. Ultimately, the appeal of the assessee was treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

In conclusion, the judgment highlighted the importance of providing a fair opportunity for parties to present their case and emphasized the necessity of complying with the statutory requirements while adjudicating matters under the Income-tax Act.