Paresh Prashant Bhide Vs Ward-12(1) (ITAT Pune)
“CIT(A) Is Not a Dismissal Counter” – ITAT Says Appeals Must Be Decided on Merits, Not Closed for Non-Compliance
The Pune ITAT strongly reiterated that the CIT(A) cannot dismiss an appeal merely because the assessee failed to appear or respond to notices. Once an appeal is filed, the appellate authority is legally obligated to examine the issues raised and pass a reasoned order on merits.
The assessee had argued that the original return was incorrectly filed by a mediator showing higher business income than actually earned, resulting in excess tax liability. Since the statutory time limit for revising the return had expired, the assessee approached the appellate authority seeking correction through appeal proceedings.
However, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal solely on the ground that no replies or documents were furnished in response to notices issued through the ITBA portal. The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) had failed to adjudicate even a single ground on merits and had simply confirmed the intimation u/s 143(1) mechanically.
Relying on the Bombay High Court judgment in Pr.CIT vs Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF), the ITAT emphasized that the powers of the CIT(A) are coterminous with those of the Assessing Officer, and therefore the appellate authority cannot dismiss appeals for “non-prosecution.” The law requires the CIT(A) to independently apply his mind and decide all issues arising from the assessment order.
Accordingly, the ITAT set aside the impugned order and restored the matter back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after granting proper opportunity to the assessee.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT PUNE
