What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found no indication of proper service of hearing notices on the assessee. Therefore, the appeals were allowed for statistical purposes to enable fresh adjudication.

The assessee filed appeals against ex-parte orders passed by the CIT(A). The assessee contended that they were not given a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) passed ex-parte orders without affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Raghavender Dhrudala vs ITO | ITAT Hyderabad 2021

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES ‘ A ‘ BENCH, HYDERABAD.

For Appellant: Shri Raghavendra Prasad

BEFORE SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI L. P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Through Virtual Hearing) (Assessment Year : 2016-17) Shri Raghavender Dhrudala, Hyderabad. PAN AGUPD 3312N …..Appellant. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 8(2), Hyderabad. …..Respondent. Appellant By : Shri Raghavendra Prasad. Respondent By : Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey (D.R.) Date of Hearing : 28.04.2021. Date of Pronouncement : 21.06.2021. O R D E R Per Shri S.S. Godara, J.M. : These appeals are filed by the assessees against the separate orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-2, Hyderabad dt.19.09.2019 passed in case No.10138/2018- 19/CIT(A)-2 in proceedings u/s.144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act').

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

At the outset, the learned authorized representative for the assessee submitted that the CIT(A) has passed ex- parte order without giving reasonable opportunity to the assessee. He prayed that the appeal may be remitted to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Learned departmental representative relied on the CIT(A)’s order of CIT(A) and submitted that the assessee had deliberately not appeared and therefore, he has passed order after considering the material available on record. We do not find any indication the lower appellate order as to whether the corresponding last hearing notice(s) stood served on the assessee or not. Faced with this situation, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee's substantive grounds back to the CIT(A) for his afresh appropriate adjudication on merits within three effective opportunities of hearing only. The assessee or learned authorised representative shall appear before the CIT(A) on or before 31.10.2021 in consequential proceedings.

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 21st June,2021.

Sd/- Sd/- (L.P. SAHU) (S.S. GODARA) Accountant Member Judicial Member Hyderabad, Dt.21.06.2021. * Reddy gp Copy to :

1. 1. i) Shri Raghavender Dhrudala, G-8, Medha Rejoice, Radhakrishna Nagar,Attapur, K V Rangareddy-500 048 PAN AGUPD 3312N 2. ITO, Ward 8(2), Hyderabad.

RAGHAVENDER DHRUDALA,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(2), HYDERABAD

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments