What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the ex parte order of the CIT(A) and restored the matter back to the CIT(A)'s file. The CIT(A) was directed to decide the appeal afresh on merits after providing a due opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex parte due to non-appearance. The assessee claims they were not given a proper opportunity to be heard as the CIT(A) was unavailable on scheduled hearing dates.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex parte order without providing a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Smt. Rama Bhandari vs ITO | ITAT Indore 2020

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SHRI MANISH BORAD

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Mourya, Sr. DR

Hearing: 08.06.2020Pronounced: 08.06.2020

Smt. Rama Bhandari, I.T.O. 5(2) Indore Indore बनाम/ (Appellant) (Revenue ) Vs. P.A. No.CGBPB4925J Appellant by None Revenue by Shri R.P. Mourya, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 08.06.2020 Date of Pronouncement: 08.06.2020 आदेश / O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, J.M: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)-II, Indore dated 08.07.2019. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1.That the CIT(A) erred in passing ex parte appeal order.

2. That the Ld. CIT(A) in a haste, vindictively passed the order due to non-appearance on the dates of hearing. 3. that the ‘a’ is a possession of deed and bank statement 1

Smt. Rama Bhandari (specified in point 6 & 7 of statement of facts) which are quite sufficient to encounter the additions made by AO and confirmed by the CIT(A), therefore it is prayed that in the natural justice, one more opportunity of proving the case may please be provided to the ‘a’ and the case please be remanded.

4. In the case-GUJARAT THEMIS BIOSYN LTD. VS JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Ahmedabad Tribunal, Aug,20, 1999 it has been stated that CIT(A) could not dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution simply because assessee had failed to put in an appearance on the various dates of hearing; impugned order is set aside and CIT(A) is directed to dispose of the appeal afresh.

At the outset of the hearing, ld. counsel for the assessee did not appear before us. However, the case has been heard with the help of Ld. Departmental Representative and submissions of the assessee. It is contended that no proper and meaningful opportunity of being heard was given to the assessee by the ld. CIT(A). He submitted that on 30.05.2019, 18.06.2019 & 05.07.2019, he was informed that ld. CIT(A) would not be attending the office on these days. It was further submitted that the Counsel himself had gone to the office of the ld. CIT(A) and found that ld. CIT(A) was not available. Therefore, it was prayed that ld. CIT(A) may be directed in this regard. On the other hand, ld. Sr. DR opposed these submissions of the learned Counsel for the assessee.

Smt. Rama Bhandari However, he submitted that the Revenue will have no objection if matter is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for decision on merit.

We have heard both the parties and perused the orders of lower authorities. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that in the interest of justice, the assessee’s matter is liable to be reconsidered by the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) is hereby directed to decide the appeal afresh on merit after affording due opportunity of being heard to the assessee as per law and the assessee is also directed to cooperate/appear before ld. CIT(A) in this regard.

In result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.

Order was pronounced in the open court on 08.06.2020.

SMT. RAMA BHANDARI,INDORE vs. THE ITO 5(2), INDORE

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments