MANYA MERCANTILE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD-7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the appeal was decided ex-parte and, in the interest of justice, restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits. The assessee was directed to cooperate in the disposal.
What were the facts?
The assessee appealed against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) for AY 2012-13. The assessee claimed non-compliance with hearing notices was due to medical reasons and COVID-19 pandemic issues.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without disposing of the case on merits, thereby violating principles of natural justice.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: SRI RAJESH KUMAR & SONJOY SARMA
order
: August 18th, 2023 ORDER
Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member:
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to Ld. ‘CIT(A)’] dated 13.06.2022 for the Assessment Year (in short ‘AY’) 2012-13.
I.T.A. No.: 420/KOL/2022 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Manya Mercantile Pvt. Ltd.
The issue raised by the assessee in the first ground is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) passing ex-parte order without disposing off on merits of the case.
Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, filed an affidavit of Sh. Uttam Kumar Surana, aged 74 years who is one of the directors of the assessee company and submitted that on couple of occasions the assessee applied for adjournment before Ld. CIT(A), however, the third notice issued fixing the date of hearing on 20.05.2022 could not be complied with as the same could not be communicated to Ld. Counsel for the assessee due to medical reasons amid the problems of COVID pandemic. Ld. A/R submitted that since the order passed by the first appellate authority is ex- parte, the assessee needs to be given one more opportunity before Ld. CIT(A) to present the case on merit so that the principles of natural justice are satisfied.
Ld. D/R, on the other hand, strongly opposed the restoring of this appeal to the file of Ld. CIT(A) on the ground that the assessee has not complied to the notice issued.
After hearing rival contentions and perusing the material on record we find that we note that the appeal has been decided ex- parte by the ld. CIT(A) when the assessee failed to turn up on the dates fixed for hearings and now, therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, the assessee deserves to be given one more opportunity to defend its case before the Ld. CIT(A) on merits. Accordingly, we restore the appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with the directions to decide the same on merits after affording the I.T.A. No.: 420/KOL/2022 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Manya Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing. Simultaneously, we also direct the assessee to cooperate in the disposal of this appeal.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Shivam Kumar vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Mahaveer Ispat Traders vs. Principal Commissioner Dgst Delhi Department Of Trade And Taxes Gnctd & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026