RAM BAHADUR THAKUR,SUPAUL vs. ITO, WARD-3 (5), SAHARSA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 252/PAT/2024Status: DisposedITAT Patna10 December 2024AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(Appeals)'s order to uphold the principle of natural justice. The matter was remanded back to the CIT(Appeals) to provide the assessee with one more opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a civil contractor, declared an income of Rs. 3,26,450, but the Assessing Officer assessed it at Rs. 48,24,990. The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(Appeals), leading to the dismissal of his appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied natural justice by the CIT(Appeals) for failing to appear, and if the matter should be remanded for a fresh hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA-PATNA ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-(KZ)

Assessment Year: 2015-2016 Ram Bahadur Thakur,….………………………Appellant H. No. 25, Lalpur, Bhimnagar, Supaul, Supaul-852338, Bihar [PAN:AFLPT3482K] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………………...Respondent Ward-3(5), Saharsa Appearances by: N o n e, appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT, appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: November 28, 2024 Date of pronouncing the order: December 10, 2024 O R D E R

The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 17th January, 2024 passed for Assessment Year 2015-16.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Civil Contractor, who filed his return of income declaring total income of Rs.3,26,450/-. The case was selected for limited scrutiny for the (A.Y. 2015-2016) Ram Bahadur Thakur reason that large value of imports shown in the Export-Import Data. Pursuant thereto, notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued and duly served upon the assessee. In response to the notices, the assessee appeared and filed his submission before the ld. Assessing Officer. After considering the submission of the assessee, ld. Assessing Officer assessed the total income at Rs.48,24,990/-.

3.

On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). The ld. CIT(Appeals) issued notices to the assessee for his compliance but the assessee failed to appear before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Hence, the ld. CIT(Appeals) considering the material available on record dismissed the assessee’s appeal by confirming the addition made by the ld. Assessing Officer.

4.

On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and raised various grounds of appeal.

5.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing.

6.

It was the submission of the ld. D.R. that the ld. CIT(Appeals) has given sufficient opportunities to the assessee but the assessee failed to appear before the ld. CIT(Appeals).

7.

I have heard D.R. the sides and perused the material available on record. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to set aside the order passed by the ld. (A.Y. 2015-2016) Ram Bahadur Thakur CIT(Appeals) in order to meet the principle of natural justice, and remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) failing which the Ld. CIT(Appeals) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits based on the materials available on the record. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →