SURENDRA KUMAR RAI,JHANSI V. DCIT 1(1) GWALIOR, GWALIOR

ITA 312/AGR/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Surendra Kumar Rai, the appellant, who contested the order of the CIT (Appeals) which dismissed his appeal ex parte regarding the assessment year 2017-18. The primary contention was the improper dismissal of his appeal without a remand report from the Assessing Officer and the lack of inquiry under sections 131/133 of the Act. The Tribunal noted that the CIT (Appeals) had issued multiple notices to the assessee, who failed to respond, but criticized the CIT (Appeals) for not discussing the merits of the case in the impugned order. The Tribunal directed a fresh hearing to ensure a reasoned decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 785131 (ITAT-AGRA)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 09-06-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHAILENDRA SRIVASTAVA
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJENDRA SHARMA
• Keywords: Set aside; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3); 142(1)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, AGRA BENCH, AGRA BEFORE : SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 312/Agr/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Surendra Kumar Rai, 91/1, Civil Lines, Station Road, Jhansi. Vs. DCIT 1(1), Gwalior. PAN :AAMPR3727K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Rajendra Sharma, Advocate Department by Sh. Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR Date of hearing 14.10.2025 Date of pronouncement 27.10.2025 ORDER PER : SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal has been preferred by assessee against the impugned order dated 15.04.2025 passed in Appeal No. CIT (A), Gwalior/10762/2019-20 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”) for the assessment year 2017-18, wherein the ld. CIT(Appeals) has dismissed assessee’s appeal ex parte. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 312/Agr/2025 2 | P a g e 2. Briefly stating, assessee e-filed return of income on 15.03.2018, declaring total income of Rs.50,65,830/-. Case was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS. Statutory notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were issued and served upon assessee. After considering assessee’s partial response on ITBA portal, the Assessing Officer assessed assessee’s total income at Rs.1,49,92,450/-, vide assessment order dated 24.12.2019 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act. 3. Aggrieved, assessee preferred first appeal before ld. CIT(Appeals), who dismissed assessee’s appeal ex parte. 4. Assessee has filed this second appeal on the ground that the ex parte impugned order is bad in law as passed without asking for the remand report from the Assessing Officer and ignoring the fact that neither the provision of section 69A was attracted nor any inquiry was made by the Assessing Officer u/s. 131/133 of the Act. 5. At the very outset, we notice that ld. CIT(Appeals) issued notices dated 07.01.2021, 04.11.2022, 22.08.2023, 29.07.2024 and 06.12.2024 to assessee for his response. However, assessee failed to make any submission before first appellate authority. It is, however, noticed that learned CIT(Appeals) passed ex-parte impugned order without any substantial discussion on the merits of the case, whereas learned Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 312/Agr/2025 3 | P a g e CIT(Appeals) was expected to state the points for determination, decision thereon and the reasons for the decision as provided u/s. 250(6) of the Act. We, therefore, deem it just and appropriate to remit the matter back to the file of learned CIT(A) for adjudication afresh on merits after affording opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The ld. CIT(Appeals) is directed to pass speaking and reasoned order. We direct the assessee to be cooperative in attending the hearings and making submissions before the learned CIT(A) for the expeditious and effective disposal. Needless to say, that learned CIT(A) shall ensure the observance of the principles of natural justice. The appeal is, thus, liable to be allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. The impugned order dated 15.04.2025 is set aside. Order pronounced in the open court on 27.10.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 27.10.2025 *aks/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Agra Printed from counselvise.com "