DAUWARAM SAHU, RAIPUR,RAIPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 414/RPR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Dauwaram Sahu against the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Raipur, concerning the assessment year 2015-16. The appeal was initially dismissed by the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC due to non-compliance by the assessee, who failed to submit required documents and evidence. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(Appeals) had a statutory obligation to adjudicate the appeal on its merits, regardless of the assessee's non-compliance, and thus remanded the case for a fresh examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 712098 (ITAT-RAIPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Other Referred Cases: CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee and Another (1979)(10 CTR 354)(SC), CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bom)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRIYANKA PATEL
• Keywords: Set aside; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण Ûयायपीठ “एक-सदèय” मामला रायपुर मɅ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR Įी पाथ[ सारथी चौधरȣ, ÛयाǓयक सदèय क े सम¢ BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.414/RPR/2025 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ /Assessment Year : 2015-16 Dauwaram Sahu House No. 27/311, Tulsi Baradera, Mandir Hasaud, Raipur (C.G.) PAN: AJHPS0039F .......अपीलाथȸ / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Income Tax Officer Ward-1(2), Raipur (C.G.) ……Ĥ×यथȸ / Respondent Assessee by : None (Adjournment Application) Revenue by : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख / Date of Hearing : 24.07.2025 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख / Date of Pronouncement : 24.07.2025 Printed from counselvise.com 2 Dauwaram Sahu Vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Raipur ITA No.414/RPR/2025 आदेश / ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 28.04.2025 for the assessment year 2015-16 as per the grounds of appeal on record. 2. At the time of hearing none appeared for the assessee. However, an adjournment application has been filed by the assessee which is rejected. The matter is heard after perusing the material available on record and considering the submissions of the Ld. Sr. DR. 3. At the very outset, it is noted that as evident from Paras 6.1 to 6.5 of the impugned order, the Ld.CIT(Appeals) /NFAC vide an ex-parte order had dismissed the appeal of the assessee due to non-compliance by the assessee. For the sake of clarity, the Paras 6.1 to 6.5 of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC order are culled out as follows: “6. Findings and Decision : 6.1 As discussed in above paras, notice u/s. 250 of the I.T. Act were issued to the appellant on various dates asking him to submit ground wise submissions. The details of the same are as under:- Printed from counselvise.com 3 Dauwaram Sahu Vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Raipur ITA No.414/RPR/2025 6.2 As can be seen above, the appellant was granted various opportunities to submit the required details. However, the appellant chose not to respond in pursuance of the notices u/s 250 of the Act as tabled above. It is relevant to state here that once the appeal is filed by the appellant, it is obligatory on its part to co-operate and pursue the same before the appellate authority in effective and productive manner. The facts of non submission of documents /evidences in support of grounds of appeal raised in Form no. 35 by the appellant clearly reveal that the appellant through its repetitive non submission of documents/evidences has shown complete lack of interest in pursuing the appeal. 6.3 It is pertinent to add here that laws assist those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights. This principle is embodied in the well-known maxim \"Vigilanctibus non dormientibusjurasubvenient\". It means equity comes to the aid of the vigilant and not the slumbering. In all actions, suits and other proceedings at law and in equity, the diligent and careful plaintiff is favored and prejudicial of him who is careless. Viewed thus, it is presumed that the appellant has no further cogent reasoning or/and evidence to substantiate the grounds taken in this impugned appeal. It is trite that the onus is on person making the claim and the primary responsibility/onus/burden for proving the claim made before the tax authorities (Assessing Officers/Appellate Authorities) lies with the assessee/appellant. In the present case, the appellant has not been able to even discharge the primary onus/burden statutorily & judicially cast upon him to substantiate the claim, made in the grounds of appeal in spite of adequate time and repeated opportunities given as brought out in the foregoing paras. 6.4 In view of the above facts of the instant case, this appeal solely on this ground is liable to be dismissed in terms of the ration of the judgements of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the Printed from counselvise.com 4 Dauwaram Sahu Vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Raipur ITA No.414/RPR/2025 case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee and Another (1979)(10 CTR 354)(SC) that an appeal means an effective appeal and that to \"prefer an appeal\" would mean effectively prosecuting an appeal. Purposefully and constructively interpreted, preferring an appeal means more than formally filing it but effectively it and if a party retreats before the contest begins, it is as good as not having entered the fray. 6.5 Thus, considering the lackadaisical approach of the appellant, it is clear that the appellant is not interested in pursuing the appeal filed by him……” 4. The Ld. Sr. DR has fairly conceded that the matter may be adjudicated denovo on merits before the first appellate authority providing one final opportunity to the assessee. 5. I have carefully considered the contents in the documents/material available on record, submissions of the Ld. Sr. DR. As per the aforesaid examination of the entire spectrum of the matter in the interest of natural justice, I deem it fit and proper to provide one final opportunity to the assessee to represent his case on merits before the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC. 6. On a perusal of the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, it is observed that the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine for non-compliance without dealing with the merits of the case. In my considered view, once an appeal is preferred before the CIT(Appeals), it becomes obligatory on his part to dispose off the same on merit and it is not open for him to summarily dismiss the appeal on Printed from counselvise.com 5 Dauwaram Sahu Vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Raipur ITA No.414/RPR/2025 account of non-prosecution of the same by the assessee. In fact, a perusal of Sec.251(1)(a) and (b), as well as the “Explanation” to Sec.251(2) of the Act reveals that the CIT(Appeals) remains under a statutory obligation to apply his mind to all the issues which arises from the impugned order before him. As per the mandate of law the CIT(Appeals) is not vested with any power to summarily dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution. The aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bom). In the aforementioned case the Hon’ble High Court had observed as under: \"8. From the aforesaid provisions, it is very clear once an appeal is preferred before the CIT(A), then in disposing of the appeal, he is obliged to make such further inquiry that he thinks fit or direct the AO to make further inquiry and report the result of the same to him as found in Sec. 250 of the Act. Further, Sec. 250(6) of the Act obliges the CIT(A) to dispose of an appeal in writing after stating the points for determination and then render a decision on each of the points which arise for consideration with reasons in support. Sec. 251(1)(a) and (h) of the Act provide that while disposing of appeal the CIT(A) would have the power to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul an assessment and/or penalty. Besides Explanation to sub- s. (2) of s. 251 of the Act also makes it clear that while considering the appeal, the CIT(A) would be entitled to consider and decide any issue arising in the proceedings before him in appeal filed for its consideration, even if the issue is not raised by the appellant in its appeal before the CIT(A). Thus once an assessee files an appeal under s. 246A of the Act, it is not open to him as of right to withdraw or not press the appeal. In fact the CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits. In fact w.e.f. 1st June, 2001 the power of the CIT(A) to set aside the order of the AO and restore it to the AO for passing a fresh order stands withdrawn. Therefore, it would be noticed that the powers of the CIT(A) are co-terminus with that of the AO i.e. he can do all that A.O could do. Therefore, just as it is not open to the AO to not complete the assessment by allowing the assessee to withdraw its return of income, it is not open to the Printed from counselvise.com 6 Dauwaram Sahu Vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Raipur ITA No.414/RPR/2025 assessee in appeal to withdraw and/or the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal on account of non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee. This is amply clear from the s. 251(1)(a) and (b) and Explanation to Sec. 251(2) of the Act which requires the CIT(A) to apply his mind to all the issues which arise from the impugned order before him whether or not the same has been raised by the appellant before him. Accordingly, the law does not empower the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution as is evident from the provisions of the Act.” 7. Respectfully following the aforesaid order, I set-aside the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC and remand the matter back to its file for denovo adjudication while complying with the principles of natural justice as per similar terms. At the same time, it is directed that this being the final opportunity, the assessee shall duly comply with the hearing notices from the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC. The Ld.CIT(Appeal)/NFAC shall accordingly pass order in terms with Section 250(4) & (6) of the Act within three months from receipt of this order. 8. As per the aforesaid terms, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. 9. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 24th day of July, 2025. Sd/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) ÛयाǓयक सदèय/JUDICIAL MEMBER रायपुर / Raipur; Ǒदनांक / Dated : 24th July, 2025. Printed from counselvise.com 7 Dauwaram Sahu Vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), Raipur ITA No.414/RPR/2025 SB, Sr. PS आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ / The Appellant. 2. Ĥ×यथȸ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT-1, Raipur (C.G.) 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, “एक-सदèय” बɅच, रायपुर / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Raipur. 5. गाड[ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, रायपुर / ITAT, Raipur Printed from counselvise.com "