RAKESH PANDEY,BALODA BAZAR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BHATAPARA, BHATAPAR

ITA 314/RPR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Rakesh Pandey, the appellant, contesting an order from the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, which had dismissed his appeal for non-compliance. The Tribunal found that the CIT(Appeals) had erred in dismissing the appeal without considering the merits, as the law requires the CIT(Appeals) to address all issues arising from the order being appealed, irrespective of the appellant's participation. The Tribunal provided a final opportunity for the appellant to present his case, directing the CIT(Appeals) to adjudicate the matter afresh in accordance with the principles of natural justice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 708661 (ITAT-RAIPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Other Referred Cases: CIT Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRIYANKA PATEL
• Assessee Lawyers: PAVEEN GOYAL
• 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.314/RPR/2025 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ /Assessment Year : 2016-17 Rakesh Pandey 274, Sadar lane, Mahamaya Chowk Lawan, Bhatapara-493 626 PAN: AJGPP8840C .......अपीलाथȸ / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Income Tax Officer Bhatapara (C.G.) ……Ĥ×यथȸ / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Paveen Goyal, CA Revenue by : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख / Date of Hearing : 30.06.2025 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख / Date of Pronouncement : 17.07.2025 2 Rakesh Pandey Vs. ITO, Bhatapara ITA No.314/RPR/2025 आदेश / ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM The captioned appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 09.06.2023 for the assessment year 2016-17 as per the grounds of appeal on record. 2. At the time of hearing Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that as evident from Paras 4 & 4.1 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 4 & 4.1 of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC’s order are culled out as follows: “4. During the course of appeal proceedings, the following notices/letters for hearing were issued to the appellant, but till date the appellant has neither filed any response nor filed any submission in support of grounds of appeal. The details of the notices issued are as under: Sl. No. Date of Notice sent Compliance Date Remarks 1. 14.01.2021 18.01.2021 No response form the appellant. 2. 01.11.2022 - Issued enablement of communication Window. No response form the appellant. 3. 28.04.2023 15.05.2023 No response form the appellant 4. 23.05.2023 07.06.2023 No response form the appellant 3 Rakesh Pandey Vs. ITO, Bhatapara ITA No.314/RPR/2025 4.1 Thus, in this case, the appellant has not effectively pursued the appellate proceedings and failed to respond to various notices issued by this office. It is important to delve into the judicial pronouncements on this issue…….” 3. 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. 4. I have carefully considered the contents in the documents/material available on record, submissions of both the parties. 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. 5. 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)/NFAC, 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 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 4 Rakesh Pandey Vs. ITO, Bhatapara ITA No.314/RPR/2025 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 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 5 Rakesh Pandey Vs. ITO, Bhatapara ITA No.314/RPR/2025 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.” 6. 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. 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. 7. As per the aforesaid terms, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 17th day of July, 2025. Sd/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) ÛयाǓयक सदèय/JUDICIAL MEMBER रायपुर / Raipur; Ǒदनांक / Dated : 17th July, 2025. SB, Sr. PS आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ / The Appellant. 2. Ĥ×यथȸ / The Respondent. 6 Rakesh Pandey Vs. ITO, Bhatapara ITA No.314/RPR/2025 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 "