What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeals to the file of the CIT(A) for re-adjudication, granting the assessee a final opportunity. The CIT(A) was directed to pass a detailed speaking order after obtaining a remand report, with liberty to draw adverse inferences if the non-cooperative attitude persisted.

The assessee, represented by Kiran Devi Khaitan and Saket Khaitan, filed appeals against the orders of the CIT(A). The assessee was repeatedly absent from hearings before the CIT(A) and the ITAT, citing medical unfitness of their representative. The ITAT noted the non-cooperative attitude of the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeals should be decided ex-parte due to the assessee's repeated non-appearance, and if so, whether the CIT(A)'s order was a speaking order.

Kiran Devi Khaitan, Rourkela vs ACIT | ITAT Cuttack 2023

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

Before: ARUN KHODPIA & ARUN KHODPIA & ARUN KHODPIA

For Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam

Hearing: 7/02Pronounced: 7/02

have been granted to the assessee. In all the cases, it is noticed that the assessee has submitted before the ld CIT(A) that Shri Narayan Kumar Khaitan is looking after all over the case records and he was medically unfit. Consequently, the assessee had sought adjournment before the ld CIT(A). Thus, clearly, the assesses are continuously seeking adjournment on one ground or others and are not serious in respect of adjudication of their appeals. However, so as to grant the assesses a final opportunity to set right their case, we are of the view that the issues must be restored to the file of the ld CIT(A) for re-adjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of hearing and we do so.

A perusal of the orders of the ld CIT(A) also show that though the ld CIT(A) has passed exparte order, the order is not a speaking order in respect of the merits or on legal issues. This being so, it is advised that the ld CIT(A) when adjudicating the appeals may pass a detailed speaking order after getting requisite remand report from the Assessing Officer. Should the assessee continue its non-cooperative attitude in the set aside proceedings, liberty is granted to the ld CIT(A) to draw adverse inference.

P a g e 3 | 4

ITA Nos.180, 181 & 182./CTK/2022 Assessment Years : 2011-12, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & 184/CTK/2022 Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2015-16

In the result, appeals of the assesses are partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 07/02/2023.

SD/- SD/- (Arun Khodpia) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 07/02/2023 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to :

1. 1. The Appellant : Kiran Devi Khaitan/Saket Khaitan.

KIRAN DEVI KHAITAN,ROURKELA vs. ACIT SAMBALPUR, SAMBALPUR

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments