MONA THACKER,CUTTACK vs. ITO, WARD-1(1),CUTTACK, CUTTACK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 158/CTK/2024Status: HeardITAT Cuttack03 June 2024AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's non-compliance but, for natural justice, set aside the appellate order. The matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer to provide one more opportunity for the assessee to present their case with evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to comply with notices issued by the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A). The CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order due to non-compliance. The assessee requested one more opportunity to present their case.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case before the Assessing Officer despite previous non-compliance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(2),Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Seth, Adv
For Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR
Hearing: 03/0Pronounced: 03/0

O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee aga This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld inst the order of the ld Addl/JCIT(A), CIT(A), Indore dated in Appeal No.CIT(A) Cuttack/10386/2019 Cuttack/10386/2019-20, for the assessment year for the assessment year 2017-18.

2.

Shri Mohit Seth Mohit Seth, ld AR appeared for the assessee. Shri the assessee. Shri S.C.Mohanty,ld Sr DR ld Sr DR represented on behalf of the revenue. represented on behalf of the revenue.

3.

It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has passed the order It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has passed the order It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has passed the order exparte on the ground of non exparte on the ground of non-compliance before him. It was his submission compliance before him. It was his submission that before the AO also, there was non that before the AO also, there was non-compliance. I compliance. It was his prayer that one more opportunity may be allowed to the assessee and he undertakes one more opportunity may be allowed to the assessee and he undertakes one more opportunity may be allowed to the assessee and he undertakes that the assessee will comply with the notices by the AO. that the assessee will comply with the notices by the AO. that the assessee will comply with the notices by the AO.

P a g e 1 | 3

4.

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

5.

i have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the impugned order clearly shows that despite various notices issued by the ld CIT(A), the assessee failed to comply with the notices. Even there was no written submission filed before the ld CIT(A). A perusal of the assessment order also shows that the assessee has neither put his appearance nor furnished any details with supporting evidence in response to the notices issued under sections 143(2)/142(1) of the Act. Thus, the appeal filed by the assessee is liable to be dismissed. However, in order to meet the ends of natural justice, I am of the considered opinion that the assessee shall be afforded one more opportunity of being heard to substantiate its case before the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, I set aside the appellate order and remit the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer to afford one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee to substantiate his case with suitable explanation and evidences and thereafter decide the issue in accordance with law.

6.

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

1.

Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 03/06/2024. Sd/- (George Mathan) JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 03/06/2024

P a g e 2 | 3

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →