MAHENDRA PRASAD,BUXAR V. ITO, WARD- 1 (5), BUXAR

ITA 292/PAT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Mahendra Prasad Krishna Brahm against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the Assessment Year 2015-16. The appeal was initially barred by limitation but was condoned due to the assessee's genuine reasons for delay. The primary contention was that the orders were passed ex-parte by both the CIT (A) and the Assessing Officer, without a proper hearing on merits, which was deemed a violation of procedural fairness under Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act. The tribunal found merit in the assessee's arguments and restored the case to the CIT (A) for a comprehensive re-evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 788962 (ITAT-PATNA)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 19-06-2025
• Laws Referred To: Section 250(6) of the Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHWANI KR. SINGAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RAKESH KUMAR
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “PATNA” BENCH, PATNA BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VP AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM ITA No.292/PAT/2025 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Mahendra Prasad Krishna Brahm, Tudiganj, Buxar, Bihar-802133 Vs. ITO, Ward 1(5) Buxar, Buxar, Bihar (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. BLYPP3169H Assessee by : Shri Rakesh Kumar, AR Revenue by : Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, DR Date of hearing: 28.11.2025 Date of pronouncement: 28.11.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 31.01.2025 for the AY 2015-16. 2. At the outset, we note that the appeal of the assessee is barred by limitation by 78 days. At the time of hearing the counsel of the assessee explained the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. The Ld. D.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that the delay is for bonafide and genuine reasons and hence, we condone the delay and adjudicate the appeal. 3. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the order was passed ex-parte by the learned CIT (A) as well as before the learned Printed from counselvise.com Page | 2 ITA No.292/PAT/2025 Mahendra Prasad ; A.Y. 2015-16 Assessing Officer. The ld. Counsel for the assessee filed an adjournment petition but the adjournment is denied by the Bench and decide the issue. 3.1. We after hearing the submission of the parties and perusing the material available on record, we find that apparently this appeal was decided ex-parte by the learned CIT (A) as well as before the learned Assessing Officer. We note that despite numerous notices, none presented before the ld. CIT (A) and the ld. CIT (A) passed an ex- parte order in limine without deciding the issues at merit, which in our opinion is in violation of Provisions of Section 250(6) of the Act. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, this appeal is restored to the file of the learned CIT (A) with a direction to decide the same on merit after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. It is further clarified that assessee should also not seek any adjournments unless otherwise required for valid and reasonable cause. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 28.11.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (DUVVURU RL REDDY) (RAJESH KUMAR) (VICE PRESIDENT) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Patna, Dated:28.11.2025 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS Printed from counselvise.com Page | 3 ITA No.292/PAT/2025 Mahendra Prasad ; A.Y. 2015-16 Copy of the Order forwarded to: BY ORDER, True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, 5. Guard file. Printed from counselvise.com "