CIT(A) Can’t Dismiss Appeal for Non-Prosecution Without Applying Mind to Issues Raised in Appeal | ITAT
- Blog|News|Income Tax|
- 2 Min Read
- By Taxmann
- |
- Last Updated on 14 February, 2025
Case Details: Vijay Krishna Bhandari vs. Income-tax Officer - [2025] 171 taxmann.com 102 (Raipur-Trib.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Ravish Sood, Judicial Member & Arun Khodpia, Accountant Member
-
Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CA for the Appellant.
-
Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
Assessing Officer (AO) initiated reassessment under section 147 after noting that the assessee sold property for Rs. 73.65 lakh but didn’t file a return. Investigation revealed the sale deed mentioned Rs. 19.06 lakh, while the market value (stamp duty) was Rs. 73.65 lakh.
With no explanation for the Rs. 54.59 lakh discrepancy, the entire Rs. 73.65 lakh was treated as unexplained capital gains under section 45. An order under section 147 read with section 144, dated 26-03-2022, determined the assessee’s income at Rs. 73.65 lakh.
The Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the case for non-prosecution due to the assessee’s absence. The assessee appealed before the Tribunal, challenging both the dismissal and the addition made by the AO.
ITAT Held
The Tribunal held that the assessee’s failure to appear before the lower authorities was unwarranted. While the Commissioner (Appeals) was correct that appeal cannot be delayed due to non-prosecution, dismissing it without examining the merits was improper.
The assessee had contested the addition under section 45, claiming the Assessing Officer erred in treating the entire sale consideration as undisclosed capital gains. The Commissioner (Appeals) should have addressed these arguments instead of dismissing the appeal outright.
As per section 251(1)(a) and (b) and the Explanation to section 251(2), the Commissioner (Appeals) is obligated to review all relevant issues. He does not have the power to reject an appeal solely for non-prosecution. Therefore, the dismissal is set aside, and the Commissioner (Appeals) is directed to decide the case on its merits.
List of Cases Referred to
- Sunil Kumar Agarwal v. CIT [2014] 47 taxmann.com 158/225 Taxman 211/[2015] 372 ITR 83 (Calcutta) (para 7)
- CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bom) (para 11).
Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.
Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.
The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:
- The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
- All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
- Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
- Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
- All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
- The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
- Font and size that’s easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied