Kiran Agrawal Vs ITO (ITAT Raipur)
Assessee’s appeal before CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte on the ground of non-prosecution, with no discussion or adjudication on merits. Assessee contended that hearing notices were sent to an incorrect e-mail ID, resulting in lack of opportunity. Tribunal noted that CIT(A) issued only one notice to the correct ID & then dismissed the appeal summarily without examining any grounds or evidence.
Relying on the Bombay High Court ruling in Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF), Tribunal reiterated that CIT(A) has no power to dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution & must adjudicate on merits as mandated u/s 250(6) & 251. Revenue also conceded that the matter should go back for a proper hearing.
Accordingly, Tribunal set aside the ex-parte NFAC order & restored the appeal to CIT(A) for denovo adjudication within three months, directing that proper opportunity be provided & Assessee must cooperate.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT RAIPUR
The captioned appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), NFAC, Delhi, [in short “Ld. CIT(A)”] passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”), dated 26.08.2025 for the Assessment Year 2022-23, which in turn arises from the assessment order dated 20.03.2024 passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act by Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department (in short “Ld. AO”).
