AI CHAMPDANY INDUSTRIES LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 167/KOL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 May 2023AY 2018-20193 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without considering the merits of the case or the delay condonation application. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte without condoning a delay and without providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The case was not decided on its merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in passing an ex-parte order without providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing and without considering the delay condonation application.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “C” KOLKATA

Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, HON’BLE & SHRI SONJOY SARMA, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri G. Hukugha Sema, CIT
Hearing: 29.05.2023Pronounced: 31.05.2023

O R D E R

PER SONJOY SARMA, JM:

1.

This appeal in for A.Y. 2018-19 is preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax, National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) [Ld. CIT in short], dated 15.02.2023. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

“1. For that the ld. CIT(A) was not justified in not condoning delay in filing appeal before him though the assessee had shown reasonable cause for the delay. 2. For that the ld. CIT(A) was not justified in passing an ex-parte order without providing any reasonable opportunity of hearing. 3. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, ld. CIT(A) ought to have admitted the appeal and disposed of the same on merit adjudicating various grounds of appeal taken before him.

4. The appellant craves leave to add further grounds of appeal or alter the grounds at the time of hearing.”

2. At the outset, ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the instant appeal is an ex-parte order without providing any reasonable opportunity of hearing and doing so ld. CIT(A) even did not consider the application for condonation of delay placed before him. Moreover, the case of the assessee was not decided on its merit. Therefore, the matter may be remand back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. On the other hand, ld. DR supported the order passed by the ld. CIT(A).

3. We after hearing the submission made by parties and perused the material available on record. We notice that the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A) is an ex-parte order and decided it without going into the merits of the case. We, therefore, remand this matter to the file of ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. We also direct the ld. CIT(A) to give reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and also direct the assessee to remain vigilant and appear before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee is also directed to file its necessary application for condonation of delay along with the documents if any before him. In terms of the above order, we allow the appeal filed by the assessee for statistical purposes.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 31.05.2023

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →