PITABASS CHHOTRAY,ROUEKELA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ROURKELA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 361/CTK/2024Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 September 2024AY 2014-152 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issues to the file of the AO for re-adjudication. This was done to grant the assessee another opportunity to substantiate their case with documentary evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) without hearing the assessee. The assessee claimed that they could cooperate if given another opportunity.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to produce documentary evidence.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

Hearing: 24/09/2024Pronounced: 24/09/2024

(िनधा�रण िनधा�रण िनधा�रण वष� िनधा�रण वष� वष� / Assessment Year : 2014-2015) वष� Pitabass Chhotray, Vs ITO, Rourkela DS Market, Deogaon, Panposh, Raghunath Palli, Rourkela, Sundargarh PAN No. :AAKPC 8313 Q (अपीलाथ� अपीलाथ� /Appellant) (��यथ� ��यथ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ� अपीलाथ� ��यथ� ��यथ� .. िनधा�रती िनधा�रती क� िनधा�रती िनधा�रती क� क� ओर क� ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Assessee by ओर : Shri S.K.Hota, Advocate राज राज�व राज राज �व �व क� �व क� क� ओर क� ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Revenue by ओर : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr.DR सुनवाई क� तारीख / Date of Hearing : 24/09/2024 घोषणा क� तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 24/09/2024 आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 15.07.2024, passed by the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1066722123(1) for the assessment year 2014-2015.

2.

It was submitted by the ld. AR that the ld CIT(A) has passed order ex-parte without hearing the assessee. It was his submission that if one more opportunity is given the assessee would be in a position to cooperate with ld CIT(A) for disposal of the appeal.

3.

Ld Sr. DR submitted that enough opportunities had been granted by the ld CIT(A) but the assessee is non-cooperative.

4.

We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A), more specifically in para 4 shows that the assessee has not furnished any documentary evidence to substantiate his claim for the year under consideration. This being so, as the documentary evidences are not being produced before the ld. CIT(A), so as to grant the assessee one more opportunity of being heard to substantiate his case, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of AO for re-adjudication after granting sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →