THE WORLD RETAILS PVT. LTD,BHUBANESWAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The ITAT, considering the interest of natural justice and the ex-parte nature of the lower order, restored the issues to the file of the CIT(A) for readjudication. The assessee was directed to produce all material evidence.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) for AY 2017-2018. The assessee sought an adjournment to collect documents, but it was rejected by the ITAT.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee was denied adequate opportunity to present its case before the lower authorities, and if the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL
O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 25.07.2023, passed in DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1054564519(1) for the assessment year 2017-2018.
None represented on behalf of the assessee. Shri Charan Dass, Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue.
An adjournment application dated 27.11.2023, which was received by the Registry on 29.11.2023, was filed by the ld. AR of the assessee, thereby seeking 30 days time to collect the papers and documents relating to the present appeal. However, looking to the facts of the case as also the impugned order is an ex-parte order on account of non- appearance of the assessee before the ld. CIT(A), we reject the adjournment application and proceed to dispose of the appeal on merits.
Ld.Sr.DR vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below. It was the submission that the assessee was given sufficient opportunity to provide the details in respect of his claim, however, the assessee could not produce the same either before the AO or before the ld. CIT(A). Therefore, the orders of both the lower authorities deserve to be upheld.
We have heard the submission of ld.Sr. DR. A perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A) shows that the ld. CIT(A) had granted a few opportunity to the assessee to represent its case before him. However, it is noticed that the assessee has not been effectively represented either before the ld. CIT(A) and consequently on account of non-availability of evidences before the ld. CIT(A), the issues have been held against the assessee. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of natural justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to produce all the material evidences in respect of his claim before the ld. CIT(A).
In the result, appeal of the assess0ee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 30/11/2023.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl.Dev Construction vs. The Proper OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Abbal Dass Arya vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax CommissionerUttarakhand · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Darbesh Medical Enterprise vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 15 Oct 2026
- Arun Aloysius Barnes vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial TaxesKarnataka · 14 Oct 2026