Onkar Mal Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur)
The ITAT Jaipur considered the assessee’s appeal against the ex parte order of the CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2009-10 arising from an assessment passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 148 of the Income-tax Act. The assessee challenged both the reopening of the assessment and the addition of ₹5,22,560 made under Section 69. At the outset, the assessee submitted that the CIT(A) had passed the ex parte order without providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing, contending that no notice had been served at the address furnished in Form No. 35. An affidavit supporting this contention was also placed on record.
The Tribunal examined the order of the CIT(A) and found that the appellate authority had not decided the issues on merits. Instead, the CIT(A) had merely upheld the Assessing Officer’s order on the ground that the appellate authority could not substitute its own judgment for that of the Assessing Officer unless the latter’s decision was shown to be biased, irrational, vindictive, or capricious.
The Tribunal held that Section 250(6) mandates the CIT(A) to pass a written order containing reasons for the conclusions reached. Since the impugned order did not satisfy the requirements of Section 250(6), it could not be sustained. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the Tribunal set aside the ex parte order and restored the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after granting the assessee a reasonable and effective opportunity of hearing. The assessee was also directed to appear before the CIT(A) within two months from the date of receipt of the Tribunal’s order. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
