SHRI RAM KUMAR SHARMA,NANGAL vs. ITO, W-1(1), NANGAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1313/CHANDI/2019Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 June 2020AY 2007-083 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeals back to the Assessing Officer (AO) to be decided afresh. The AO was directed to provide the assessee with a due opportunity of hearing and to examine all necessary evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were dismissed by the CIT(A) without a proper hearing, as the assessee's representative was unavailable due to being out of India. The assessee sought an opportunity to present their case with necessary evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeals ex-parte without granting a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Whether the assessee should be allowed to present evidence before the AO.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 271B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

आदेश/Order

PER BENCH:

1.

The present appeals have been filed by the assessee against the consolidated orders dated 26.07.2019 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax-1 Chandigarh [in short referred to as CIT(A)] passed u/s 250(6) of the Income Tax Act,1961(hereinafter referred to as “Act”) in quantum appeals and in appeal against penalty levied u/s 271B of the Act for assessment years 2007-08 to 2012-13.

2.

At the outset itself, ld. counsel for the assessee pointed out that the ld. CIT(A) had dismissed all the appeals without hearing the assessee. That the ld. CIT(A) had passed ex-parte order on noting that the assessee had time and again sought adjournments or had not attended the proceedings before him. The ld. counsel for the assessee drew our attention to para 4 of the CIT(A) where he had outlined the various dates on which notices were issued for hearing and had remained unattended. Referring to the same, ld. counsel for the assessee pointed out that initially the assessee was being represented by one Shri Chetan Aggarwal, Advocate and that thereafter, the ld. counsel for the assessee before us Shri Tej Mohan Singh had filed his Power of Attorney to argue the case before the ld. CIT(A). That subsequently, it was brought to the notice of the ld. CIT(A) that his A.R. was out of India and therefore, the cases could not be represented. The ld. counsel for the assessee contended that the ld. CIT(A) went on to decide the case ex-parte. He contended that the case had been decided by the ld. CIT(A) without giving a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee and that there were evidences which were needed to be filed in the present case.

A list of the same was filed before us as under :

“…..record the books of account alongwith supporting documents in the shape of purchase bills, sale bills, audit reports, sales tax returns”.

3.

The ld. counsel for the assessee pleaded that in the interest of justice, the matter be heard afresh to enable the assessee an opportunity to represent his case alongwith all necessary evidences.

That since the evidences will need to be examined ,he pleaded, that the appeals be restored back to the AO

4.

The ld. DR did not object to the same.

5.

In view of the above, in the interest of justice ,all the appeals are restored back to the AO to be decided afresh after giving the assessee due opportunity of hearing and also opportunity to file all necessary evidences.The AO is directed to examine all the evidences filed and after considering the submissions of the assessee to decide the matters afresh.

6.

In effect, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 30.06.2020.

More judgments on Section 271B

All 1,993 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →