PATLIPUTRA BUILDERS LTD,PATNA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, PATNA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 51/PAT/2021Status: DisposedITAT Patna15 May 2023AY 2008-093 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the hearing dates were during the Covid pandemic and the assessee claimed non-receipt of notices. Therefore, the interest of justice requires an opportunity for the assessee to present its case.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals against penalty levies were decided ex parte by the CIT(A). The assessee claimed they did not receive hearing notices and the dates fell during the Covid pandemic.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) orders were validly passed ex parte, considering the Covid pandemic and alleged non-receipt of notices by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “PATNA BENCH, PATNA

Before: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar

order : May 15, 2023 आदेश / ORDER संजय गग�, �या�यक सद�य �वारा / Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The captioned appeals have been preferred by the assessee against the separate orders dated 15.03.2021 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Patna [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).

2.

The assessee in these appeals has agitated the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act.

3.

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the impugned orders of the ld. CIT(A) to submit that the impugned orders in all the three appeals are ex parte orders. The ld. Counsel has submitted that in fact the assessee did not receive any of the notice of hearing issued by the ld. CIT(A). Moreover, the alleged dates of hearing mentioned by the CIT(A) were during the Covid Assessment Years: 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 Patliputra Builders Limited pandemic period, therefore, under the circumstances, the assessee could not represent his case before the CIT(A). That the assessee may be given opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A).

4.

In view of the above submissions, we note that the impugned date of hearings mentioned by the CIT(A) are dated 21.01.2021, 22.02.2021 & 05.03.2021 which dates fall during the Covid Pandemic period. Moreover, it is the case of the assessee that the assessee did not receive the notices of hearings of the aforesaid dates. In our view, the interests of justice will be well-served if the assessee is given an opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A). The impugned orders of the CIT(A) in the captioned appeals are set aside and the matter in all the three captioned appeals is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for decision afresh. Needless to say that the ld. CIT(A) will give proper opportunity to the assessee to present its case and thereafter to decide the matter in accordance with law.

5.

In the result, all the captioned appeals are treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 15th May, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- [Rajesh Kumar] [Sanjay Garg] लेखा सद�य/Accountant Member �या�यक सद�य/Judicial Member Dated: 15.05.2023. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Patliputra Builders Limited 2. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Patna 3. CIT (A)- 4. CIT- , I.T.A. Nos.49,50&51/Pat/2021 Assessment Years: 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 Patliputra Builders Limited

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →