Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCH “SMC”, HYDERABAD
Before: SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “SMC”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year:2014-15 Vinay Kumar Agarwal, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward-10(2), PAN: ADHPA 8514 H Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri S. Rama Rao Revenue by: Smt. B. Kavitha Date of hearing: 14/06/2021 Date of pronouncement: 22/06/2021 ORDER PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM.:
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-6, Hyderabad in appeal No. 0227/2016-17/B2/CIT(A)-6, Hyderabad dated 1/11/2017 passed U/s. 143(3) r.w.s 250(6) of the Act for the AY 2014-15.
The assessee has raised three grounds in his appeal and they are extracted herein below for reference:-
“1. The order of the Ld. CIT (A) is erroneous both on facts and in law. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in taxing the amount of Rs. 2,94,157/- at the rate of 30% without considering the fact that only normal rate of tax is applicable to the said amount. 3. Any other ground or grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing.”
At the outset, the Ld. AR submitted before us by stating that the Ld. CIT (A) has passed ex-parte order without providing proper opportunity to the assessee of being heard. It was therefore pleaded that the matter may be remitted back to the file of the Ld CIT (A) in order to provide one more opportunity to the assessee of being heard. Ld. DR, on the other hand, vehemently opposed to the submissions of the Ld. AR and argued that sufficient opportunities had been provided to the assessee however, on the given dates of hearing, neither the assessee nor its Representative appeared before the Ld. CIT (A). Therefore the Ld. CIT (A) had no other option but to pass ex-parte order based on the materials available on record. Hence, it was pleaded that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) does not call for any interference.
I have heard the rival submissions and carefully perused the materials on record. On examining the facts of the case, I find merit in the submissions of the Ld. DR. It appears that the Ld. CIT (A) had posted the case on several occasions. However, none appeared on behalf of the assessee before the CIT(A) on the dates of hearing. Therefore, the Ld. CIT (A) was left with no other option except to adjudicate the appeal ex-parte. In this situation, I do not find much strength in the arguments advanced by the ld. AR. However, considering the issues involved in the appeal as well as the prayer of the Ld. AR, in the interest of justice, I hereby remit the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT (A) in order to consider the appeal afresh on merits by providing one more opportunity to the assessee of being heard. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate before the Ld. CIT (A) in the proceedings failing which the Ld. CIT (A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits based on the materials on the record. It is ordered accordingly.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove.
Pronounced in the open Court on 22nd June, 2021.