DIPAK KUMAR MURJANI,SAMBALPUR vs. I T O WARD- 2 (1), SAMBALPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 92/CTK/2022Status: HeardITAT Cuttack09 February 2023AY 2017-182 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order and restored the appeal to the CIT(A)'s file for readjudication. The assessee was granted an adequate opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order. The assessee requested an adjournment due to illness, which was rejected. The assessee was unable to represent its appeal before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order passed ex-parte without granting adequate opportunity to the assessee is sustainable in the interest of natural justice.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA

Hearing: 09/02/2023Pronounced: 09/02/2023

O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 21.03.2022 passed in DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2021- 22/1041161452(1), for the assessment year 2017-2018.

2.

None represented on behalf of the assessee. However, the assessee has filed an adjournment letter mentioning that the counsel is suffering from cold and fever. The adjournment application is not substantiated and, therefore, the adjournment cannot be granted and the same stands rejected.

3.

A perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A) shows that the order has been passed ex-parte. Consequently the assessee has not been able to represent its appeal before the ld. CIT(A). In the circumstances, in the

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →