SHRI KARAMVEER,JIND vs. ITO, W-2, JIND

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1580/CHANDI/2019Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 July 2020AY 2011-124 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not recorded any submissions from the assessee's counsel and that the assessee was entitled to a reasonable opportunity of hearing. Therefore, the impugned order of the CIT(A) was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed to the CIT(A) against an assessment order. The CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) failed to provide a proper hearing.

What were the issues?

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

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6),Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

आदेश/Order

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

1.

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 29.7.2019 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Hisar [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’]

2.

The assessee in this appeal has taken following grounds of appeal:- -Chd-2019 Shri Karamveer, Jind 2

1. That on the facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the Worthy CIT(A) in Appeal No. 247/HSR/2018-19 has erred in passing that order in contravention of the provisions of Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2. That on law, facts and circumstances of the case, the Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO wherein he had made addition of Rs. 12,54,500/- u/s 68 on account of alleged unexplained cash deposits in bank. 3. That on law, facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order passed by Worthy CIT(A) deserves to be set-aside as no reasonable opportunity of being heard was afforded to the appellant. 4. That on law, facts and circumstances of the case, the assessment order passed by Ld. AO deserves to be set-aside as no reasonable opportunity of being heard was afforded by him to the appellant. 5. That the appellant craves leave for any addition, deletion or amendment in the grounds of appeal on or before the disposal of the same.

4.

In this appeal, the main grievance of the assessee relates to the ex- parte order passed by the CIT (A).

5.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the very outset, has stated that the Ld. CIT(A) has not given reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. That the appeal of the assessee has been decided after perusal of the assessment order. In this respect, Ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the impugned ex-parte order of the CIT(A). -Chd-2019 Shri Karamveer, Jind 3 5. The Ld. DR has not rebutted the above submissions of the Ld.

Counsel for the assessee.

6.

We have gone through the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). We find that the Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order has taken excerpts from the assessment order, however, no submissions of the counsel of the assessee has been recorded in the order. We find force in the contention of the Ld. CIT(A) that the assessee was required to be given reasonable opportunity of hearing before deciding the appeal of the assessee on merits. In view of the above discussion, we are of the view, that the interest of justice will be well served, if the assessee is given an opportunity to present his case before the Ld. CIT(A). In view of this, the impugned order of the CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for decision afresh. Needless to say that CIT(A) will provide proper opportunity to the assessee to present his case and thereafter pass order afresh as per the provisions of the law.

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

Order pronounced on 06.07.2020

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →