The failure to provide a fair opportunity to the assessee renders an ex-parte assessment invalid according to the principles of natural justice.

0 BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy l-a@ ITA No. 1571/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2020-21 Aditya Saini cuke Income Tax Officer, 1211 B3 Barkat Nagar, Gandhi Vs. Ward 6(2), Jaipur Nagar, Jaipur LFkk;h y[s kk l-a@thvkbvZ kj l-a@PAN/GIR No.: IFVPS8965E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj l@s Assessee by : Sh. Sunil Morani, CA jktLo dh vksj l@s Revenue by : Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 08/10/2025 mn?kk"s k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 11/11/2025 vkn's k@ ORDER PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM On being aggrieved by the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [ for short CIT(A)] dated 07/11/2024 the captioned assessee preferred the present appeal. The dispute relates to the assessment year 2020-21. The said order of the ld. CIT(A) arises because the assessee has challenged the assessment order dated 18.09.2022 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ for short “Act”] by the Assessment Unit of Income Tax Department [ for short AO].

2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds: -

“1. The assessee objects to the Exparte order passed by Hon'ble Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) National Faceless Centre Delhi as order passed without giving proper opportunity and unreasonably shorter period notices were given in the month of September 2024 in which professional were busy in filing tax audits as well as income tax returns of audits cases shows the intention of Hon'ble CIT Appeal for passing Exparte Order and prays that the same has been passed without following the provision of law hence bad in law, without jurisdiction deserve to be annulled.

2. Assessee also object dismissal of order by Hon'ble CIT appeals without giving proper opportunity looking to the law of natural justice specially when main order passed under section 144 of the Income Tax Act 1961 without hear to the assessee and also followed by the CIT appeals.

3. Assessee reserve the right to add, alter or withdrawn of any ground of appeal

3. Apropos to the grounds so raised by the assessee the relevant finding of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC is reiterated here in below:

Findings and Decision

5. The appeal was taken up and notice dated 13.09.2024, 23.09.2024 and 03.10.2024 was issued to the appellant fixing hearing on 20.09.2024, 30.09.2024 and 10.10.2024. However, the appellant neither responded on that date nor any adjournment was sought. No written submission was also filed. In view of repeated ignorance of the notices, it was clear that the appellant was not interested in pursuing appeal.

5.1 By repeated non compliance and not filing any written submission, the appellant has shown that he is not interested in pursuing the appeal. In view of these facts, I have no alternative but to dismiss the appeal of the appellant for non-prosecution as it cannot be kept pending adjudication for indefinite period. It is the duty of the appellant to make necessary arrangements for effective representation on the appointed date. Mere filing of an appeal is not enough, rather it requires effective prosecution also. Therefore, the appeal is found liable for dismissal. This view is supported by the following judicial pronouncements:-

(i) CIT vs Multiplan India Ltd. 38 ITD 320(Del)

(ii) Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (M.P.)

(iii) New Diwan Oil Mills vs. CIT (2008) 296 ITR 495 (P&H)

(iv) CIT vs. B. N. Bhatachargee And Another 118 ITR 461 (SC).

5.2 The Hon'ble ITA T, Jabalpur Bench, Jabalpur in the case of M/s Bindra Warehousing Corporation, Itarsi vs ITO, No. 153/Jab/2016 and in Jabalpur Sahkari Dugdh Sangh vs ITO, No. 201 to 203/Jab/2015 has found assessee as not interested in pursuing appeal on the