KAMDHENU GEMS PVT. LTD,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-1(1)(3), SURAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 755/SRT/2018Status: DisposedITAT Surat03 September 2021AY 2010-112 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A)'s order was ex-parte and non-speaking, violating principles of natural justice. Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2010-11 was directed against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A). The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A) and consequently, their case was not adjudicated on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice and if a fresh opportunity for adjudication is warranted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURATBENCH

Before: SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A.L.SAINI, AM

Hearing: 03/09/2021Pronounced: 03/09/2021

Appellant by : None Revenue by : Ritesh Mishra, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 03/09/2021 Date of Pronouncement : 03/09/2021 आदेश / O R D E R

Per Dr. A. L. Saini, AM:

1.

The captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2010-11, is directed against the order passed by ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Surat, in Appeal No. CIT(A) Surat-1/11021/2017-18, dated 27.09.2018, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144 r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).

2.

At the outset itself, we note that impugned order passed by the ld CIT(A) is an ex-parte order and assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) therefore, we are of the view that in the interest of justice, another opportunity to contest the appeal before the Ld. first appellate authority may be granted to the assessee.

3.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee in spite of issuance of notice of hearing. We have heard ld DR for the Revenue and observed that order passed by the ld CIT(A) is an ex parte order, non-speaking order, hence ld DR for the Revenue has fairly agreed that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before the ld. CIT(A).

Assessment Year.2010-11 Kamdhenu Gems Pvt. Ltd. 4. We note that order passed by the ld CIT(A) is not in accordance with the mandate of the provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. We note that in the assessee’s case under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s 144 r.w.s 147 of the Act and the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex parte order and non-speaking order, therefore, we do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee.

Considering the above facts, we note that assessee could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A). We note that the ld. CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits based on the material available before him hence it is a violation of principle of natural justice. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the ld CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →