SANDEEP KUMAR CHAURASIYA,FAIZABAD V. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 1, NEW FAIZABAD, FAIZABAD

ITA 742/LKW/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Sandeep Kumar Chaurasiya, the appellant, who filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] for the assessment year 2015-16. The appellant's return of income was initially assessed by the Income Tax Officer, adding a significant amount as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A) dismissed the appellant's appeal for non-prosecution, which was contested in the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that both the assessment order and the CIT(A)'s order were passed ex-parte and lacked a speaking order on merits, violating section 250(6) of the Act. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the matter for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 772633 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: REVENUE WAS; R. N. N. SHUKLA
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

"I.T.A. No.742/Lkw/2024 Assessment Year:2015-16 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH ‘A’, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.742/Lkw/2024 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sandeep Kumar Chaurasiya Akavara Gajraj Ka Purwa Narayanpur, Faizabad. PAN:CVZPK6185N Vs. Income Tax Officer-1, Faizabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) O R D E R PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA:A.M. (A) This appeal vide I.T.A. No.742/LKW/2024 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2015-16 against impugned appellate order dated 27/06/2024 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1066133352(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. (B) The facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee filed his return of income on 31/05/2022 showing income of Rs.1,76,989/-. The Assessing Officer passed assessment order u/s 147 read with section 144/155B of the Act on 17/03/2023 and determined the total income of the assessee at Appellant by None Respondent by Shri R. N. N. Shukla, Addl. CIT (D.R.) Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.742/Lkw/2024 Assessment Year:2015-16 2 Rs.14,06,210/- by making addition of Rs.12,30,000/- on account of unexplained money under section 69A of the Act. The order passed by the Assessing Officer was an ex-parte order qua the assessee. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal in the office of learned CIT(A). Vide impugned appellate order dated 27/06/2024, the assessee’s appeal was dismissed by the learned CIT(A) for non prosecution. The order of learned CIT(A) was also passed ex-parte qua the appellant assessee. (C) At the time of hearing before the Tribunal, there was no representation from the assessee’s side. In the absence of any representation from the assessee’s side, the learned D.R. for Revenue was heard and the materials on record were perused. On perusal of records, it is seen that the assessment order as well as the impugned appellate order of the learned CIT(A), both were passed ex-parte qua the appellant assessee. It is noticed that learned CIT(A) failed to pass a speaking order on merits and dismissed the assessee’s appeal in a summary manner in violation of the provisions u/s 250(6) of the Act. Under provisions of section 250(6) of the I.T. Act, the learned CIT(A) was required to dispose of the appeal stating the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision. In other words, the order of the learned CIT(A) must be a speaking order on merits of the case. The CIT(A) cannot dismiss appeal for non-compliance on the part of the appellant. The unambiguous provisions of section 250(6) of the I.T. Act require CIT(A) to pass speaking order on merits whether or not there was any attendance or compliance to the notices, on the part of the appellant assessee. The learned Departmental Representative was also in agreement with this. In view of the foregoing, the impugned appellate order of learned CIT(A) dated 27/06/2024 is set aside and issues in dispute are restored back to the file of learned CIT(A) with the direction to pass de novo speaking order in Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A. No.742/Lkw/2024 Assessment Year:2015-16 3 accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee, and ensuring adherence with provisions of section 250(6) of the I.T. Act. (D) In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes. (Order pronounced in the open court on 28/08/2025) Sd/. Sd/. (KUL BHARAT) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) Vice President Accountant Member Dated:28/08/2025 *Singh Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. Concerned CIT 4. D.R. ITAT, Lucknow Printed from counselvise.com "