SANTLAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MAINPURI V. WARD 2(1)(2) AGRA, AGRA

ITA 269/AGR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Santlal Industries Limited appealing against an order from the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), which confirmed disallowances made by the Assessing Officer. The disallowances included a total expenditure of Rs.1,91,41,247 and a deduction claim of Rs.4,11,91,807 after setting off unabsorbed depreciation. The primary contention in the appeal was the alleged lack of a proper opportunity of hearing afforded to the appellant by the CIT(Appeals). The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal found that while notices were issued to the assessee, they remained unresponded, and the CIT(Appeals) had passed an ex-parte order without discussing the merits of the case. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to remit the matter back to the CIT(Appeals) for a detailed examination on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 713197 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUKESH KUMAR JAIN
• Assessee Lawyers: PRARTHANA JALAN
• Keywords: Set aside; Depreciation; Principle of natural justice; Unabsorbed depreciation
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE :SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.269/Agr/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Santlal Industries Limited, 233, Marain Nagar, Mainpuri, Vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward 2(1)(2), Agra. PAN : AAFCS4152B (Appellant) (Respondent) ORDER PER : SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal has been preferred by assessee against the impugned order dated 21.03.2025 passed in Appeal No. NFAC/2017-18/10005995 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) wherein the ld. CIT(Appeals) has dismissed assessee’s appeal, confirming the disallowance of total expenditure amounting to Rs.1,91,41,247/- and disallowance of deduction claimed amounting to Rs.4,11,91,807/- after setting off of unabsorbed depreciation, made by the Assessing Officer vide Assessee by Ms. Prarthana Jalan, CA (Adjournment application rejected) Department by Sh. Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT/DR Date of hearing 16.07.2025 Date of pronouncement 30.07.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.269/Agr/2025 2 | P a g e assessment order dated 25.02.2021 passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Act. 2. This appeal has been preferred on the ground, in addition to other grounds, that the ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming the assessment order ex parte, without affording proper opportunity of hearing to the appellant assessee. 3. Perused the records and heard learned representative for the assessee and ld. departmental representative for the revenue. 4. Learned AR initially submitted an adjournment application, which was rejected. She later submitted that the impugned order of ld. CIT(Appeals) is not sustainable, having been passed without affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 5. Ld. DR, on the other hand, has submitted that sufficient opportunities were afforded to the appellant by ld. CIT(Appeals). He supported the impugned order. 6. Perusal of the impugned order shows that during the appellate proceedings, learned CIT(Appeals) issued various notices to the assessee, which remained un-responded on behalf of the assessee. Such a conduct of the assessee cannot be appreciated. It is, however, noticed that learned CIT(Appeals) has also passed ex-parte impugned order without any discussion on the merits of the case, whereas learned CIT(Appeals) was Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.269/Agr/2025 3 | P a g e expected to state the points for determination, decision thereon and the reasons for the decision as provided u/s. 250(6) of the Act. In the circumstances and in the interest of justice and fair play, we deem it just and appropriate to afford last opportunity to the assessee and remit the matter back to the file of learned CIT(Appeals) for adjudication on merits. We order accordingly. We further direct the assessee to be diligent and cooperative in attending the hearings and making submissions before the learned CIT(Appeals) for the expeditious and effective disposal. Assessee shall refrain from seeking any adjournment but for compelling and unavoidable reasons. Needless to say that learned CIT(Appeals) shall ensure the observance of the principles of natural justice. The appeal is liable to be allowed accordingly. 7. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. The impugned order dt. 21.03.2025 is set aside. Order pronounced in the open court on 30.07.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 30.07.2025 *aks/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra Printed from counselvise.com "