MR. GURDAYAL SINGH,BARBIL vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), CUTTACK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 135/CTK/2024Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 June 2024AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had not discussed the issues in relation to the assessee's written submissions nor called for further information. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for readjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2014-2015. The assessee did not appear before the ITAT despite multiple opportunities and notices. The CIT(A) had also noted the assessee's non-appearance before him.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated the appeal on merits when the assessee did not appear and the CIT(A) did not discuss the written submissions or seek further information.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL

Hearing: 19/06/2024Pronounced: 19/06/2024

O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 07.02.2024, passed by the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1060617011(1) for the assessment year 2014-2015.

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue.

3.

It was submitted by the ld. Sr. DR that multiple opportunities have been given to the assessee to appear before the ld. CIT(A) and the assessee has chosen not to appear. It was the submission that the ld. CIT(A) has adjudicated the appeal of the assessee on merits. It was thus the submission that the order of the ld. CIT(A) is liable to be upheld.

4.

We have considered the submission of the ld. Sr. DR. A perusal of the facts of the present case clearly shows that the appeal was filed by 19.03.2024. Notice for hearing was sent to the assessee through mail. As the assessee had not appeared on the last date of hearing i.e. on 21st May, 2024, a physical notice through Speed Post was issued to the assessee, wherein it was specifically mentioned that last opportunity has been given. As the assessee has chosen not to appear before the Tribunal, the appeal of the assessee is being disposed off accordingly.

5.

A perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A) shows that the assessee has not appeared before him though opportunities had been granted. Ld. CIT(A) has also recorded in para 5 of his order that the assessee had made a written submission dated 01.12.2023. Ld.CIT(A) further in para 7 to 7.4 has not discussed the issues in relation to the written submission filed by the assessee nor he has called for any further evidence or information that he might have required for adjudication of the appeal. This being so, in the interest of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.

6.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 19/06/2024. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH AGARWAL) (GEORGE MATHAN) ऱेखा सदस्य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER कटक Cuttack; ददनाांक Dated 19/06/2024 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →