ABDUL WAHID CHOWDHURY,BADARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- KARIMGANJ, KARIMGANJ

PDF · subscribers
ITA 9/GTY/2023Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati07 June 2023AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s order was passed ex parte and before the scheduled hearing date. In the interest of justice, the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal contested an addition of Rs. 10,10,000/- made by the Assessing Officer under Section 69A. The CIT(A) passed an ex parte order, which was dated prior to the hearing date it had scheduled.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order passed ex parte and prior to the scheduled hearing date is valid. The need to provide the assessee an opportunity to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 250,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “GUWAHATI BENCH, GUWAHATI

Before: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

order : June 07, 2023 आदेश / ORDER संजय गग�, �या�यक सद�य �वारा / Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 15.11.2022 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’).

2.

The assessee in this appeal has contested the addition made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.10,10,000/- by invoking the provisions of section 69A of the Act.

3.

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the impugned order of the CIT(A) to submit that the same is an ex parte order. The ld. Counsel has further invited our attention to page 2 of the impugned order of the CIT(A) to submit that the ld. CIT(A)

1.

Assessment Year: 2017-18 Abdul Wahid Chowdhury has mentioned in the table that final opportunity of being heard through notice dated 07.11.2022 was granted and the case was fixed for 22.11.2022. The ld. Counsel has further invited our attention to the title of the impugned order to submit that the impugned order, however, was passed by the CIT(A) on 15.11.2022, itself, i.e. prior to the date of hearing fixed by the CIT(A). The ld. Counsel has further invited our attention to the impugned order of the Assessing Officer to submit that the same is an ex parte order passed u/s 144 of the Act. The ld. Counsel therefore has submitted that in the interests of justice, the assessee may be given an opportunity to present his case before the Assessing Officer.

4.

In view of the above submission of the assessee, in our view, the interests of justice will be well-served, if the assessee is given an opportunity to present his case before the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, the impugned order of the CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for decision afresh. Needless to say that the Assessing Officer will give proper opportunity to the assessee to present his case.

5.

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

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →