M/S. MYSORE FRUIT PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), BENGALURU

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5/BANG/2023Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 April 2023AY 2014-154 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for a decision on merits. The CIT(A) was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte due to the counsel's ill health. The assessee contended that they were not given a sufficient opportunity to be heard.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in deciding the appeal ex-parte without providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU

For Appellant: Shri Krishnamurthy Shibaraya, C.A
For Respondent: Shri G Manoj Kumar, CIT (DR)
Hearing: 30.03.2023

O R D E R Per: L. P. Sahu A.M.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the CIT-11, Bangalore vide order dated 26/10/2022, DIN ITBA/APL/M/250/2022-23/1046470924(1) for the assessment year 2014-15.

2.

In the course of hearing, it was pointed out by the learned counsel of the assessee that the learned CIT(A) had decided the matters ex-parte. The ld.AR further submitted that due to ill health of the counsel, the case could not be presented in time and the CIT(A) passed order in a hurry without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, which is clear from the statement acts. Therefore, it would be in the interest of justice, the matter may be restored to his file for deciding various grounds of appeal on merits.

3.

The learned DR agreed with the aforesaid statement of the learned AR.

4.

We have considered the facts of the case and the request made by the learned AR. We are of the view that interest of justice will be served if the matter is restored to the file of first appellate authority for deciding various grounds of appeal of the assessee on merits. Accordingly, the CIT(A) is directed to afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and thereafter decide the appeal on merits. We direct the assessee to represent his case before the CIT (A) with all the relevant evidences at his own risk and responsibility to be followed by three effective opportunities of hearing.

5.

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →