What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) and restored the matter back to the file of the CIT(A). The CIT(A) was directed to decide the appeal afresh after giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A). The assessee was not given an opportunity of hearing by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without providing an opportunity of hearing to the assessee, violating principles of natural justice.

The Sub Registrar, Sarpavaram vs The Director of Income… | ITAT Visakhapatnam 2020

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM

(Through web-based video conferencing platform)

BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HON'BLE ACCOUNANT MEMBER

ITA No. 82/VIZ/2020 (Asst. Year : 2011-12)

The Sub-Registrar, Sarpavaram, Kakinada (Rural), vs. Director of Income Tax (Intelligence),

East Godavari District. Hyderabad.

PAN No. AAAGS 3001 C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by : None

Department By : Smt. U. Minichandran, Sr. DR

Date of hearing : 21/09/2020. Date of pronouncement : 21/09/2020.

O R D E R

PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld.CIT(A)-2, Guntur, dated 26/08/2019 for the A.Y. 2011-12.

- 2. When this appeal is taken up for hearing, we noticed that ld.CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee. - 3. Learned Departmental Representative has submitted that as many as opportunities have been granted by the ld. CIT(A) which were not utilized by the assessee. Therefore, no further

2 ITA No. 82/VIZ/2020 (The Sub-Registrar, Sarpavaram)

opportunity is required to be given to the assessee and requested

to confirm the order of the ld.CIT(A).

We have perused the material available on record and orders

of the authorities below.

We find that ld. CIT(A) passed ex-parte order therefore by

following the principles of natural justice, one more opportunity

should be given to the assessee to pursue the appeal. Thus, we

set aside the order passed by the ld.CIT(A) and restore the matter

back to the file of ld. CIT(A) directing him to decide the appeal

afresh after giving affordable opportunity to the assessee.

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

purpose.

Order Pronounced in open Court on this 21 st day of Sep., 2020.

Sd/- sd/- (D.S. SUNDER SINGH) (V. DURGA RAO) Accountant Member Judicial Member

Dated : 21 st September, 2020.

vr/-

Copy to:

- 1. The Assessee- The Sub-Registrar, Sarpavaram, Kakinada (Rural), East Godavari District. - 2. The Revenue – Director of Income Tax (Intelligence), Hyderabad. - 3. The CIT(A)-2, Visakhapatnam. - 4. The D.R., Visakhapatnam. - 5. Guard file.

By order

(VUKKEM RAMBABU) Senior Private Secretary, ITAT, Visakhapatnam.

THE SUB REGISTRAR,SARPAVARAM vs. THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX(INTELL), HYDERABAD

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments