SANTOSH KUMAR ROUT,KENDRAPARA vs. ITO, KENDRAPARA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) passed the order ex-parte without providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Therefore, the case was restored to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment to ensure justice.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was disposed of ex-parte without a proper hearing, and the original assessment was also made ex-parte under Section 144. The assessee's representative argued that opportunities granted during the Covid period were insufficient.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in disposing of the appeal ex-parte without granting a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Whether the assessee should be granted a fresh opportunity for assessment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH, ‘SMC’CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN
Assessee by : Shri K.K.Bal, Adv Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR Date of hearing: 4.1.2024 Date of pronouncement: 4.1.2024 ORDER This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 28.8.2023 of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No.CIT(A), Cuttack/10156/2018-19 for the assessment year 2013-14 2. Shri K.K.Bal, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue.
It was submitted by ld AR that the appeal filed by the assessee against the assessment order has been disposed off by the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi without hearing the assessee. It was the submission that the so called opportunities granted by the ld CIT(A) was during the Covid period and thereafter, the order has been passed exparte. It was also the submission that the assessment has been completed by the AO u/s.144 of the Act due to non compliance by the assessee. Therefore, it was the prayer that the assessee may be granted another opportunity to put forth his case before the Assessing Officer.
In reply, ld Sr DR submitted that the assessee had been granted sufficient opportunities by the Assessing Officer as well as by ld CIT(A). It was the submission by ld Sr DR that even the assessee has not produced any evidence before the ld CIT(A). Consequently, ld CIT(A) has passed the order exparte.
I have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the ld CIT(A) clearly shows that the order has been passed exparte without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Even the assessment order has been passed exparte u/s 144 of the Act. Before me, ld AR undertakes that if an opportunity is granted, he will cooperate with the Assessing officer by producing the evidences, as required for completing the assessment. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for a denovo assessment. The assessee is directed to cooperate with the Assessing Officer for early completion of assessment.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Manoj Kumar Das vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Superwealth Financial Enterprises Private Limited, Khordha vs. Joint Commissioner Good And Service Tax Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Simanchal Sahoo vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Prafulla Chandra Khatua, Mayurbhanj vs. The State Tax Officer Of CT And GST, MayurbhanjOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sidhivinayak Roadways, Sundergarh vs. Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise, Rourkela Commissionerate, RourkelaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026