What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) was not justified in passing an ex-parte order. In the interest of justice, the matter was set aside and restored to the file of the CIT(A) to be decided afresh after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

The assessee filed an appeal against the ex-parte order of the CIT(A). The assessee did not appear before the Tribunal, while the Revenue was represented. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order without affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in passing an ex-parte order without affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Sri Praskash Kumar Panda, Bhadrak vs ITO | ITAT Cuttack 2023

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,

Before: AND RAJESH KUMAR

For Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR, Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK (Through virtual hearing) BEFORE BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL JUDICIAL MEMBER AND AND RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2017-18 18 Shri Prakash Kumar Panda, Shri Prakash Kumar Panda, Vs. ITO, Bhadrak ITO, Bhadrak At: Bankasahi, Bhadrak At: Bankasahi, Bhadrak PAN/GIR No. PAN/GIR No.AHTPP 0990L (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR Date of Hearing : 27 /0 06/2023 Date of Pronouncement : 27 /0 /06/2023 O R D E R Per Bench

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi , NFAC, Delhi dated 3.3.2023 in Appeal No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/1050394906 (1) 23/1050394906 (1) for the assessment year 2017-18. 18.

None appeared None appeared for the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR for the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue. appeared for the revenue.

We have heard ld Sr. DR have heard ld Sr. DR. A perusal of the impugned order clearly . A perusal of the impugned order clearly shows that the ld CIT(A) has passed the order exparte shows that the ld CIT(A) has passed the order exparte shows that the ld CIT(A) has passed the order exparte and has not afforded reasonable opportunity of hearing. Therefore, we are of the view that the reasonable opportunity of hearing. Therefore, we are of the view that the reasonable opportunity of hearing. Therefore, we are of the view that the P a g e 1 | 2 ld CIT(A) was not justified in passing exparte order. Accordingly, we, in the interest of justice, consider it fair and reasonable that one more opportunity be provided to the assessee to represent his case before the ld. CIT and accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT and restore the matter to his file who shall decide the same afresh and according to law after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assesseee

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

Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 27/06/2023.

SD/- SD/- (Rajesh Kumar) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 27/06/2023 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Shri Prakash Kumar Panda, At: Bankasahi, Bhadrak 2. The Respondent: ITO, Bhadrak 3. The CIT(A)-, NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr.CIT-, Cuttack 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy//

SRI PRASKASH KUMAR PANDA,BHADRAK vs. ITO BHADRAK WARD, BHADRAK

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments