What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for re-adjudication, granting the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee was directed to comply with future notices and provide supporting evidence.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-compliance with notices. The assessee argued that the CIT(A) order was passed without a reasonable opportunity of hearing and challenged the reopening of assessment.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order was passed ex-parte without affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee, and the validity of assessment reopening.

Anjana Devi Tulshyan, Sambalpur vs ITO | ITAT Cuttack 2024

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,

Before: BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv, Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv

For Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR

Hearing: 30/09/20Pronounced: 30/09/2

Assessment Year : 2015-16 Anjana Devi Tulshyan Anjana Devi Tulshyan, C/O- Vs. The The Assessing Assessing Officer, Officer, Purushottam Purushottam Dayal Dayal National National Faceless Faceless Tulshyan, Tulshyan, At: At: Khetrajpur, Khetrajpur, Assessment Centre, Delhi Assessment Centre, Delhi PO: Balmukund, Dora Lane, PO: Balmukund, Dora Lane, dist: Sambalpur dist: Sambalpur PAN/GIR No. .ABBPT 0587 F (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv : Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR , ld Sr DR Date of Hearing : 30/09/20 2024 Date of Pronouncement : 30/09/2 2024 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld inst the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 20.06.2024 in Appeal in Appeal No.NFAC/2014- 15/10127230 for the assessment year 2015 15/10127230 for the assessment year 2015-16.

Shri P.K.Mishra, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Shri P.K.Mishra, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Shri P.K.Mishra, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue. S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue.

It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has passed the It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has passed the It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has passed the impugned order exparte wit impugned order exparte without affording reasonable opportunity of hout affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. hearing to the assessee. It was the submission that the Assessing Officer It was the submission that the Assessing Officer

P a g e 1 | 3 has reopened the assessment without having any fresh or tangible information in his possession by merely relying upon the information from DDIT(Inv) Unit. Ld AR has also challenged the reopening of assessment on the ground that the approval has been granted by ld JCIT, which is required to be granted by ld Pr.CIT after four years from the date of passing of the original assessment order. It was his request that the matter be restored to the file of the ld CIT(A) for re-adjudication both on legal and merits.

In reply, ld Sr DR supported the order of the AO and ld CIT(A).

I have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the assessee has been provided four opportunities to represent his case before the ld CIT(A), as is evident from the page 5 and 6 of the order. As the assessee failed to comply with the notices, the ld CIT(A) had no option but to dismiss the appeal of the assessee exparte. Before the Tribunal, ld AR prays for one more opportunity to represent his case before the ld CIT(A). In view of above, in the interest of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the ld CIT(A) for readjudication after allowing the assessee reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to comply with the notices issued by the ld CIT(A) and file documentary evidences in support of his case, as so desires.

P a g e 2 | 3

In the result, appeal of assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 30/09/2024. Sd/- (George Mathan) JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 30/09/2024 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Anjana Devi Tulshyan, C/O- Purushottam Dayal Tulshyan, At: Khetrajpur, PO: Balmukund, Dora Lane, dist: Sambalpur 2. The Respondent: The Assessing Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi 3. The CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr.CIT, Sambalpur 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. By order //True Copy// Sr.Pvt. Secretary ITAT, Cuttack

P a g e 3 | 3

ANJANA DEVI TULSHYAN,SAMBALPUR vs. ITO,WARD-2(1), SAMBALPUR

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments