CIT(A) Can't Simply Dismiss Any Appeal U/s 250 On Account Of Non-Prosecution, Without Discussing Merits Of Case: Ahmedabad ITAT
The Ahmedabad ITAT emphasized that as per Section 250 of the Income tax Act, it is incumbent on the CIT(A) to make necessary enquiry before passing the order and he is obliged to decide each of the points arising out of the appeal i.e. grounds on merits have to be discussed even in an ex-parte order.The Bench of Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member) and Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial...
The Ahmedabad ITAT emphasized that as per Section 250 of the Income tax Act, it is incumbent on the CIT(A) to make necessary enquiry before passing the order and he is obliged to decide each of the points arising out of the appeal i.e. grounds on merits have to be discussed even in an ex-parte order.
The Bench of Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member) and Siddhartha Nautiyal (Judicial Member) observed that “In view of Section 250(4) and 250(6) of the Act, CIT(A) has no power to dismiss an appeal on account of non-prosecution, without discussing the merits of the case”. (Para 8)
As per the brief facts of the case, the assessee filed return declaring total income of Rs.1,20,000/- resulting in assessment u/s 144 r.w.s 147, in which the Assessing Officer disallowed short-term capital losses of Rs.3,25,511/- on the ground that the assessee was engaged in accommodation entries / bogus capital gains / losses. The AO was of the view that the assessee had traded in a script, namely, Prerna Infrabuild Limited, which was a bogus company and did not exist at its address. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer was of the view that the assessee had incurred bogus short-term capital losses amounting to Rs.3,25,511/- which were required to be disallowed. On appeal, the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order, upholding the order of the Assessing Officer
The Bench found that since two dates of hearing were falling within the Covid period, it can be concluded that the assessee was precluded to cause appearance before CIT owing to genuine reasons.
Further, the Bench observed that the CIT passed the appellate order without discussing the facts of the case and the issues under consideration and the individual grounds of appeal raised by the assessee and simply proceeded to uphold the assessment order, without any discussion on the issue under consideration before him.
The Bench therefore concluded that the CIT(A) has erred in facts and in law in summarily dismissing the assessee's appeals for the assessment years under consideration, by passing a non-speaking order, without mentioning the various grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in his appellate order and without discussing the merits of the case.
Hence, the ITAT set aside the cases to the file of CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee to present his case on merits.
Counsel for Appellant/ Assessee: Hemanshu Shah
Counsel for Respondent/ Revenue: Sanjay Jain
Case Title: Babubhai Ramanbhai Patel verses Deputy CIT
Case Number: I.T.A. No.904/Ahd/2023