Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH,
Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM
O R D E R
PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM:
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee LLP against the order of the Ld.CIT(A)/NFAC dated 13.06.2020 for AY 2012-13.
At the outset, it is noted that this Tribunal had dismissed the appeal of the assessee in the first round as not maintainable, since the assessee omitted to file the grounds of appeal as well as it was an ex-parte order qua assessee dated 23.12.2022. However, the assessee preferred Miscellaneous Application (MA) against the order passed by the Tribunal dated 23.12.2022 and the Tribunal was pleased to recall the order, since the Tribunal order was an ex-parte order.
2 A.Y. 2012-13 Savla Buildwell LLP 3. Having restored the appeal, I proceed with the hearing of appeal. From perusal of the grounds of appeal inter-alia ground no. 1 is noted to be against the action of the Ld. CIT(A) passing an ex-parte order without providing adequate opportunity of being heard. The Ld. AR drew my attention to para no. 5.1 of the impugned order wherein he has stated that despite notices assessee has not responded by filing submission nor sought any adjournment. Therefore, he was pleased to dismiss the appeal merely by reproducing the assessment order and without assigning any reason on the grounds of appeal raised by assessee. Assailing the action of Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. AR pleads that the impugned action of Ld. CIT(A) is per-se violative of natural justice and prays that the appeal be restored back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC.
4. Per contra, the Ld. DR opposes the plea of the assessee for second innings and submitted that the assessee ought to have been vigilant. And therefore, the assessee should not be given another opportunity.
5. I have heard both the parties and perused the records. It is noted that the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is an ex-parte order qua assessee. The Ld. CIT(A) has noted that the despite notices the assessee has not filed any submissions nor sought any adjournment. Therefore, he has confirmed the action of the AO without assigning any reasons as stipulated u/s 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act’). According to the assessee, the assessee has not received any notices. In this regard, it is noted that the Ld. CIT(A) has 3 A.Y. 2012-13 Savla Buildwell LLP not given any details of the notices nor asserted that the notices were served upon the assessee. In such circumstances, the impugned order of the NFAC cannot be countenanced. Therefore, the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is set aside and the appeal restored back to his file to adjudicate/pass order in accordance to sub-section (6) of section 250 of the Act. And the assessee is directed to file written submission/relevant documents to support its grounds of appeal raised before Ld CIT(A), and request for hearing if it desires as per Rules, and Ld. CIT(A) to pass orders in accordance to law after hearing the assessee.