PRATAP BALAJI NIKAM,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2224/PUN/2016Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 January 2020AY 2010-115 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(Appeals) order was ex-parte and not decided on merits. Observing the principles of natural justice, the Tribunal decided to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to present their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(Appeals) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-prosecution, despite multiple opportunities and adjournment requests. The CIT(Appeals) decided the case based on available documents without a detailed merit adjudication.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Appeals) order passed ex-parte without adjudicating on merits is sustainable. Whether principles of natural justice require a further opportunity for the assessee to present their case.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, AM & SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Ganoo
For Respondent: Shri Satish C. Grover
Hearing: 06.01.2020Pronounced: 06.01.2020

आदेश / ORDER

PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM :

1.

This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals), Pune-10 dated 08.03.2016 for the assessment year 2010-11 as per the grounds of appeal on record.

2. At the very outset, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the order passed by the Ld.CIT(Appeals) is an ex-parte order and that the rights and liabilities of the parties herein are not adjudicated on merits by the First Appellate Authority. That the appeal of the assessee was dismissed on the ground of non-prosecution and was decided as per annexure enclosed along with Form-35 in the appeal memo before the Ld. CIT(Appeals). There were no separate written submissions or relevant documents that was filed before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) which would have helped the Ld. CIT(Appeals) to adjudicate the case on merits.

3.

That on perusal of Para 4 of the CIT(Appeals)’s order, it is apparent, several opportunities were provided to the assessee asking him to attend the hearing. However, the assessee for first few occasions had filed adjournment petition while, thereafter, has neither attended the hearing nor requested for adjournment. For the sake of completeness, the descriptions of notice are as under:

Date of issue Date of hearing Remarks 1 24.12.2014 07.01.2015 Nobody attended nor request for adjournment received 2 03.02.2015 25.02.2015 Request letter for adjournment 3 24.02.2015 09.03.2015 Request letter for adjournment 4 19.03.2015 06.04.2015 Request letter for adjournment 06.04.2015 01.05.2015 Request letter for 5 adjournment 6 07.05.2015 22.05.2015 Request letter for adjournment 7 04.09.2015 16.09.2015 Nobody attended nor request for adjournment received

09.10.2015 21.10.2015 Nobody attended nor 8 request for adjournment received 9 10.12.2015 04.01.2016 Nobody attended nor request for adjournment received 10 16.02.2016 07.03.2016 Nobody attended nor request for adjournment received

4.

That further it is evident from Para 5 of the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) that he has decided the appeal on the basis of documents available on record. These documents were nothing but annexure enclosed along with Form 35 i.e. statement of facts and grounds of appeal. The Ld. AR of the assessee already has stated that no separate written submissions or any other supporting documents regarding merits of the case were filed before the Ld. CIT(Appeals). The process of judicial adjudication requires Sub- ordinate Appellate Authority to adjudicate the case on merits and come out with a speaking order. In the present case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) was unable to do so because of the evasive nature of the assessee. However, keeping in mind the principles of natural justice and the very fact, the Income Tax Act is welfare legislation; we are of the considered view that one final opportunity should be given to the assessee to present their case on merits. Therefore, the Ld. AR is directed to present himself before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) immediately on receipt of this order along with relevant/ necessary documents to present their case on merits before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) and he shall adjudicate the same by passing a speaking order while complying with the principles of natural justice. In view of the aforesaid directions, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) and remit the matter back to his file. Any issuance of notice is dispensed with.

5.

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

Order pronounced on 06th day of January, 2020.

Sd/- Sd/- ANIL CHATURVEDI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ऩुणे / Pune; ददनाांक / Dated : 06th January, 2020. SB आदेश की प्रनिलऱपप अग्रेपषि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अऩीऱाथी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 2.

3. The CIT(Appeals), Pune-10.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →