ABIRCHAND KOCHAR,CUTTACK vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 153/CTK/2024Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack29 May 2024AY 2017-20183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order and remanded the matter back for readjudication. The assessee was granted a fresh opportunity to be heard, subject to a cost of Rs. 5,000.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte without hearing the assessee. The assessee requested one more opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: MANISH AGARWAL

For Appellant: Shri C.Parida, Adv, Shri C.Parida, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Charan Dass, ld Sr DR
Hearing: 29/0Pronounced: 29/0

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 31.1.2024 in Appeal No.NFAC/2016 31.1.2024 in Appeal No.NFAC/2016- 17/10274716 for the assessment year 2017-18.

2.

Shri C.Parida, C.Parida, ld AR assisted by Shri Soumya Ranjan Dixit, intern of assisted by Shri Soumya Ranjan Dixit, intern of National Law University, Cuttack National Law University, Cuttack appeared for the assessee and Shri the assessee and Shri Charan Dass, Ld CIT Ld CIT DR assisted by Ms Shreyanshi Patra, intern of assisted by Ms Shreyanshi Patra, intern of Madhusudhan Law University, Cuttack Law University, Cuttack appeared for the revenue.

P a g e 1 | 3 Assessment Year : 2017-18

3.

It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has passed order exparte 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. 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 impugned order clearly shows that the assessee has not represented his case before the ld CIT(A). Even no document or evidence has been filed in support of the claim of the assessee. Before us, ld AR has prayed to allow one more opportunity to present its case. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the ld CIT(A) and remit the matter back to his file for readjudication after affording reasonable opportunities of hearing to the assessee, subject to cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five Thousand only) to be deposited within 60 days from the date of this order under the head “others” in ITNS challan 280 in the Account No.500. In the event the cost is not paid, the order passed by the ld CIT(A) and that of the AO would stand confirmed.

P a g e 2 | 3 Assessment Year : 2017-18

5.

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

Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 29/05/2024.

Sd/- sd/- (Manish Agarwal) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 29/05/2024 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Abirchand Kochar, Jhola Sahi, Cuttack 2. The Respondent: Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Delhi 3. The CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr.CIT, 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// By order

Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack

P a g e 3 | 3

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →