What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the ex-parte dismissal by the CIT(A) was not permissible in law as it violated the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the matter was set aside to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte due to the assessee's non-appearance. The CIT(A) did not dispose of the appeal on merits. The assessee has filed an appeal before the ITAT against this ex-parte order.

What were the issues?

Whether an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) for non-prosecution is valid and whether the principles of natural justice were violated.

Raj Kumar Gupta (HUF), Ranchi vs ITO | s.250 | ITAT Ranchi 2020

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH, E-Court at KOLKATA

Before: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RANCHI BENCH, E-Court at KOLKATA (Before Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member & Sri S.S. Godara, Judicial Member) Assessment Year: 2015-16 Raj Kumar Gupta (HUF)....................................................................................................Appellant [PAN: AAJHR 2944 B] Vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Ranchi.………………..….......................................................................Respondent Appearances by: None appeared on behalf of the Assessee. Sh. N.S. Kalkho, JCIT, appeared on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : September 2nd, 2020 Date of pronouncing the order : September 16th, 2020

ORDER

Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, AM:

This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Ranchi [hereinafter ‘CIT(A)’ for short] dated 17.12.2018 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ for short) for AY 2015-16.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee. There is no application for adjournment either. We find that the ld. CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order. He has not disposed off the appeal on merits. Such dismissal for non-prosecution is not permissible in law. 3. The ld. DR submitted that the issue may be restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) as there was violation of principles of natural justice. 4. Under these circumstances we set aside the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law.

Assessment Year: 2015-16 Raj Kumar Gupta (HUF). 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 16th September, 2020. Sd/- Sd/- [S.S. Godara] [J. Sudhakar Reddy] Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 16.09.2020 Bidhan Copy of the order forwarded to:

1. 1. Raj Kumar Gupta (HUF), C/o D.P. Paul (FCA), 718/A Nabin Mitra Road, Near Samsung Plaza, Burdwan Compound, Lalpur, Ranchi-834 001.

2. ITO, Ward-2(3), Ranchi. 3. CIT(A)-Ranchi. 4. CIT- 5. CIT(DR), Ranchi Bench, Ranchi.

RAJ KUMAR GUPTA (HUF),RANCHI vs. ITO,WARD-2(3), RANCHI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments