M/S. ARES MEDICARE(P) LTD,CUTTACK vs. ITO WARD-2(3), CUTTACK
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the lower authorities' orders and restored the matter to the CIT(A). The assessee was granted one more opportunity to appear and cooperate with the appellate proceedings.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte because the assessee could not appear despite multiple notices. The assessee's representative argued that due to the faceless regime and online notice issuance, it was difficult to track all communications.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee was sufficiently notified and given a proper opportunity to be heard before the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
Before: ARUN KHODPIA & ARUN KHODPIA & ARUN KHODPIA
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, NFAC, Delhi, Delhi, dated 27.9.2022 27.9.2022 in Appeal No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022 /NFAC/S/250/2022-23/1046013899(1) for the assessment year for the assessment year 2016-17.
Shri P.R.Mohanty, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Shri P.R.Mohanty, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Shri P.R.Mohanty, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohant, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue. S.C.Mohant, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue.
It was submitted by ld AR that It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has passed the the ld CIT(A) has passed the impugned order e impugned order exparte qua the assessee on the ground that the assessee xparte qua the assessee on the ground that the assessee
P a g e 1 | 3 could not appear before him despite giving several notices. He also submitted that now days in the faceless regime, notices are issued online and the portal is managed by the Authorised Representative, who files the return and the appeals are filed by other counsels and it is difficult for the assessee to actually be aware about the notices issued by the department. It was submitted that it is also not possible to check everyday regarding the status of the case. It was the submission that due to above reasons, the assessee could not respond the notices issued by the ld CIT(A). It was his prayer that if one more opportunity is given to the assessee, he undertakes to appear before the ld CIT(A) and cooperate in finalizing the appellate proceedings.
Ld D.R. had no objection to the above submission of ld A.R. of the assessee.
We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the of the order of the ld CIT(A) shows that the ld CIT(A) has fixed the appeals on seven occasions i.e. on 4.2.2020, 12.2.2020, 20.1.2021, 11.11.2021, 23.11.2021 and 7.1.2022 and 21.4.2022. As the assessee was unable to respond to the notices, the ld CIT(A) has passed the order exparte without considering the merits of the case. Before us, ld AR has prayed that if one more opportunity is allowed, he will cooperate with the appellate proceedings. In view of above, we set aside the orders of lower P a g e 2 | 3 authorities and restore the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) to redecide the issues in the appeal after allowing reasonable and proper opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is directed to render full co-operation to the CIT(A) by filing all the details as and when called upon to do so. With these directions, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.
Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 19/01/2023. Sd/- sd/- (Arun Khodpia) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 19/01/2023 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : M/s. Ares Medicare Pvt Ltd., Block-C, Shop No.48-52, Periphery Market Complex, Buxi Bazar, Cuttack 2. The Respondent: ITO, Ward-2(3), Cuttack 3. The CIT(A)-, NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr.CIT-, Cuttack 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy// By order
Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack
P a g e 3 | 3
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Tvl. Sri Bhuvaneshwari And Co vs. The Deputy Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026
- Giri Paints vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026
- Rahul Radheshyam Chauhan vs. Union Of INDIA Thru The Sec. Ministry Of Law And Justice And OrsBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- S.Murugesan vs. The Deputy Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Annai Garden vs. The Commercial Tax Officer / The State Tax OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026