Ex-Parte Orders by CIT(A) Set Aside; Matter Remanded for Adjudication on Merits

By | January 12, 2026
0 Comment

Ex-Parte Orders by CIT(A) Set Aside; Matter Remanded for Adjudication on Merits

 

Issue

Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] was justified in passing ex-parte orders confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer without discussing the merits of the case, simply because the assessee sought adjournments.

Facts

  • Appeals: Three separate appeals (likely ITA Nos. 304, 305, and 306/Chd/2025) for different assessment years.

  • Appellant: The Assessee.

  • Respondent: DCIT, Exemptions / NFAC.

  • The Grievance: The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeals via ex-parte orders (dated 13.01.2025).

  • Assessee’s Plea: The counsel argued that the CIT(A) did not afford a proper opportunity of being heard and failed to appreciate the facts or decide the case on merits, merely confirming the AO’s order mechanically.

  • Department’s Stand: The CIT(A) noted that the assessee was repeatedly asking for adjournments, which justified proceeding ex-parte.

Decision

  • Duty of CIT(A): The Tribunal emphasized that even if an assessee is non-compliant or seeks adjournments, the CIT(A) is legally obligated to pass the order on merits based on the material available on record. Dismissing an appeal in limine (at the threshold) or without discussing the core issues is not the correct approach.

  • Natural Justice: To uphold the principles of natural justice, the Tribunal decided to grant the assessee one more opportunity.

  • Verdict: The impugned orders for all three years were set aside. The matter was restored to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate afresh on merits after giving the assessee a proper opportunity to be heard.

  • Condition: The Assessee was strictly directed to cooperate and not contribute to unnecessary delays in the fresh proceedings. [Matter Remanded]

Key Takeaways

  • Merits Matter: An Appellate Authority (CIT(A)) cannot simply dismiss an appeal for default (non-appearance). Under Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, they must state the points for determination and the decision thereon—i.e., decide on merits.

  • Adjournments: While seeking too many adjournments is risky, Appellate Tribunals (ITAT) are generally lenient in ensuring that a substantive tax demand is not confirmed solely due to procedural lapses, provided the assessee shows intent to cooperate.

  • Statistical Allowance: The appeals are “allowed for statistical purposes,” meaning the case is effectively reset to the First Appellate stage.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH
Shaheed Bhagat Singh Polyethnic
Vs.
The DCIT
Exemptions
Circle 1,
Chandigarh
ITA Nos. 304 to 306/CHD/2025
Date of Pronouncement : 08.01.2026

Source :-  Judgement