Case Law Details
Alok Gupta Vs Assessing Authority NFAC (ITAT Lucknow)
CIT(A) Cannot Dismiss in Limine – Tribunal Protects Assessee – Appeal Restored for Fresh Hearing on Merits – Rs.3.80 Cr Addition to Be Re-Examined
Assessee, engaged in mobile recharge & telecom coupon business, filed appeal against order of CIT(A)-NFAC,.
AO had reopened assessment u/s 147 & completed it u/s 144/144B, making addition of Rs.3,80,00,000/- u/s 68 as unexplained cash credit, thereby assessing total income at Rs.4.02 crore against returned income of Rs.22.80 lakh. Assessee appealed to CIT(A), but the appeal was dismissed summarily without dealing with merits.
Before Tribunal, Assessee contended that CIT(A) failed to pass a speaking order as mandated u/s 250(6) & dismissed the appeal in a summary manner without giving adequate opportunity. Revenue did not object to remand.
Tribunal held that CIT(A) has statutory duty to adjudicate all grounds on merits & pass a reasoned order. Dismissal in limine violated s.250(6). Therefore, it set aside CIT(A)’s order & remanded matter back with direction to decide afresh on merits after giving reasonable opportunity.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT LUCKNOW
This appeal vide I.T.A. No.222/Lkw/2025 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2014-15 against the impugned appellate order dated 18/11/2024 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1070418846(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short].
2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and enjoying income from charging coupon, related to mobiles and telecommunication. The assessee filed his return of income for the year under consideration on 21/11/2014 declaring total income at Rs.22,80,130/-The Assessing Officer completed the assessment and passed assessment order on 22/03/2022 u/s 147 read with section 144/144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for short) and determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.4,02,80,130/- by making addition of Rs.3,80,00,000/- under section 68 of the Act. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal in the office of learned CIT(A). Vide impugned order dated 18/11/2024, the assessee’s appeal was dismissed by the learned CIT(A).
3. Being aggrieved, the assessee has filed the present appeal in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal against the aforesaid impugned appellate order of learned CIT(A). In the course of appellate proceedings in ITAT, learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT(A) has passed order without affording sufficient time and opportunity to the assessee. The learned AR for the assessee further submitted that the learned CIT(A) failed to pass a speaking order on merits and dismissed the assessee’s appeal in a summary manner for violation of the provisions u/s 250(6) of the Act. He further submitted that the learned CIT(A) is duty bound u/s 250(6) of the IT Act to pass a speaking order on various grounds of appeal, on merits, but learned CIT(A) failed to do so. In view of the foregoing, learned AR for the assessee submitted, the impugned order of learned CIT(A) should be set aside and the issue in dispute should be restored to the file of learned CIT(A) with the direction to pass fresh order in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.
4. The learned Sr. D.R. for the Revenue did not raise any objection and left the matter to the discretion of the Bench.
5. We have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. We are of the considered view, in view of section 250(6) of the I. T. Act, the learned CIT(A) has statutory duty to pass a speaking order on merits on the various grounds of appeal filed by the assessee. Having regard to the same, and in view of the submissions made by the Learned counsel for the assessee, we set aside the impugned appellate order dated 18/11/2024 to the file of learned CIT(A) and we direct the learned CIT(A) to pass de novo speaking order on merits in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
(Order pronounced in the open court on 24/09/2025)
Author Bio
