Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
Before: MANISH AGARWAL
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MANISH AGARWAL MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & 316 /CTK/20 /CTK/2023 Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2014 13 & 2014-15 M/s. M/s. Geetarani Geetarani Mohanty, Mohanty, Vs. Asst. Asst. Commissioner Commissioner of of Station Station Road, Road, Barbil, Barbil, Income Tax, Circle Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Keonjhar Cuttack PAN/GIR No PAN/GIR No.AADFG 1692 D (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.C.Sethi, Adv Revenue by : Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT Sanjay Kumar, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 08/0 07/2024 Date of Pronouncement : 08/0 /07/2024 O R D E R Per Bench
Both the Both the appeals filed by the assessee are directed are directed against the separate orders of the ld ers of the ld CIT(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, both both dated 21.8.2023 in Appeal No.Cuttack/10434/2017 in Appeal No.Cuttack/10434/2017-18 and Cuttack/10386/2016 18 and Cuttack/10386/2016-17 for the assessment year assessment years 2012-13 & 2014-15, respectively.
Shri P.C.Sethi, P.C.Sethi, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri the assessee and Shri Sanjay Kumar, Ld CIT Ld CIT DR appeared for the revenue.
P a g e 1 | 3 & 316 /CTK/2023 Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2014-15
It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A)-2, Bhubaneswar has passed order exparte without affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. He submitted that although in response to notice dated 21.10.2022 issued by ld CIT(A), the assessee had made submission in regard to the jurisdiction for deciding the appeal, however, ld CIT(A) without considering the same, has passed the order after a period of 10 months from the date of notice. He prayed that the matter may be remitted back to the file of the AO for fresh consideration of the issues in this appeal.
In reply, ld CIT DR supported the order of the AO and ld CIT(A).
We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the impugned order clearly shows that the ld CIT(A) has issued notices in the ITBA portal and the assessee has also responded to the same. However, the assessee had disputed the jurisdiction of the ld CIT(A) to decide the appeal, which was not considered and the appeal was passed by the CIT(A) after a lapse of eight months from the said date. Since the documentary evidences in support of the claim were not furnished, the ld CIT(A) has passed the exparte order. Now, ld AR has undertaken before us that if one more opportunity is granted, the assessee would be in a position to file the documentary evidences to substantiate the claim before the Assessing officer. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the ld CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the Assessing
P a g e 2 | 3 & 316 /CTK/2023 Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2014-15 Officer to re-adjudicate the issue after affording reasonable opportunities of hearing to the assessee.
In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 08/07/2024.
Sd/- sd/- (Manish Agarwal) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 08/07/2024 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : M/s. Geetarani Mohanty, Station Road, Barbil, Keonjhar 2. The Respondent: Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Cuttack 3. The Pr. CIT(A)-2, Bhubaneswar 4. Pr.CIT-2, Bhubaneswar 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. By order //True Copy//
Sr.Pvt.secretary, ITAT, Cuttack
P a g e 3 | 3