Subscribe to the Bombay Chartered Accountant Journal Subscribe Now!

October 2020

Sections 250 and 271AAA – Ex parte dismissal of appeal by CIT(A), without considering the material on record on the ground that the written submissions were not signed by the assessee, is contrary to the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 250

By Jagdish T. Punjabi | Prachi Parekh
Chartered Accountants | Devendra Jain
Advocate
Reading Time 2 mins

3. 118 taxmann.com 223 (Raj.)(Trib.) Keshavlal Devkaranbhai Patel vs. ACIT ITA No. 124 /Rajkot/2017 A.Y.: 2012-13 Date of order: 28th July, 2020

 

Sections 250 and 271AAA – Ex parte
dismissal of appeal by CIT(A), without considering the material on record on
the ground that the written submissions were not signed by the assessee, is
contrary to the provisions of sub-section (6) of section 250

 

FACTS


Aggrieved by the
order levying penalty u/s 271AAA, the assessee preferred an appeal to the
CIT(A). The assessee had filed his explanation before the A.O. and also before
the CIT(A). However, the submissions filed before the CIT(A) were not signed by
the assessee.

 

In view of this,
the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal by recording that the assessee was not
interested in pursuing the appeal.

 

Aggrieved, the
assessee preferred an appeal to the Tribunal.

 

HELD


The Tribunal found
the order of the CIT(A) to be very cryptic and not having any discussion on the
material already available on record before him. The Tribunal observed that:

(i)   there is no valid and justifiable reason
given by the appellate authority in his order while dismissing the claim of the
assessee;

(ii)  the CIT(A) has recorded in his order that the
assessee has filed written submissions in the office on 29th August,
2017 but without signature, hence the same were not considered by the CIT(A);
and

(iii) the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for want of
prosecution even when the written submission was on record which did not bear
the signature of the assessee.

 

The Tribunal held
that the CIT(A) ought to have adjourned the matter and passed a further
direction to file fresh written submissions, duly signed. It is a basic
principle that justice should not only be done, but it must also be seen to be
done. In the absence of that, the Tribunal held, the order impugned is not in
consonance with the spirit and object of sub-section (6) of section 250.

 

The Tribunal set
aside the issue to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate it
afresh after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard and to pass a
speaking order thereon keeping in mind, inter alia, the mandate of the
provisions of section 250(6) in order to render true and effective justice.

You May Also Like