What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had adjudicated the appeal ex-parte. Setting aside the CIT(A)'s order, the matter was restored for a fresh decision on merits, with an opportunity for the assessee to present its case.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte due to non-appearance. The assessee claimed to have appeared on some dates and that absences on other dates were unintentional, citing issues with notice delivery and the COVID period.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without properly considering the assessee's submissions and appearances, thereby violating principles of natural justice.

Goutam Chandra Das vs I.T.O., Ward - 22(1). Kolkata | ITAT Kolkata 2023

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG, HON’BLE & DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate

Hearing: 14/02/2023Pronounced: 24/02/2023

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

The present appeal is directed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (hereinafter the “ld. CIT(A)”) dt. 19/12/2022, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act’), for Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. A perusal of the grounds of appeal reveal that the sole issue being agitated before us is that, the ld. CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order, while confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in making addition of Rs.76,69,261/- under various heads, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(A) had issued notice of hearing on 26/03/2018 fixing the hearing on 10/04/2018, in compliance to which, the assessee appeared before the ld. CIT(A) through his authorized Counsel and also filed written submissions along with enclosures. But the ld. CIT(A) erred in not taking cognizance of the same and adjourned the case sine die. That the ld. CIT(A) has Assessment Year: 2015-16 Goutam Chandra Das erred in noting non-compliance in respect of the notice of hearing dt. 04/01/2021, as the same fell within the COVID period. That, in respect of the notice of hearing dt. 27/09/2022, there was a change in the e-mail id of the assessee due to which the notice was not received and complied with. That the order of the ld. CIT(A) is not in accordance with the provision of Section 250(6) of the Act.

The ld. D/R, though not leaving his grounds, could not controvert this factual position.

We have considered the rival contentions of the Ld. Representatives of the parties. We find that the appeal of the assessee has been adjudicated ex-parte by the ld. CIT(A) on the ground of non-appearance. Whereas the assessee has claimed that he had appeared on some dates and on other dates, his absence was not intentional. Under these circumstances, the impugned order of the CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for deciding the issues afresh on merits in accordance with law. Needless to say that CIT(A) will give adequate opportunity to the assessee to present its case.

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

Order pronounced in the Court on 24th February, 2023 at Kolkata. (Manish Borad) Judicial Member Kolkata, Dated 24/02/2023 *SC SrPs Assessment Year: 2015-16 Goutam Chandra Das आदेश क" ""त"ल"प अ"े"षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ" / The Appellant

""यथ" / The Respondent 2. संबं"धत आयकर आयु"त / Concerned Pr. CIT 3. आयकर आयु"त ( अपील ) 4. / The CIT(A)- "वभागीय ""त"न"ध अ"धकरण अपील"य आयकर कोलकाता/DR,ITAT, Kolkata, 5. , , गाड" फाईल /Guard file. 6. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

GOUTAM CHANDRA DAS,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 22(1). KOLKATA, KOLKATA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments