What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, granting one more opportunity to the assessee based on the principle of natural justice. A cost of Rs. 10,000 was imposed on the assessee for past conduct.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided exparte due to non-compliance despite several opportunities. The assessee's counsel pleaded for a fresh opportunity, assuring full cooperation.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an exparte order without granting proper opportunity to the assessee.

Umamani Raul, Khurda vs ITO | ITAT Cuttack 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK

Before: SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG

For Appellant: Shri P.C.Sethi, AR

For Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR

Hearing: 30/04

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK

BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No.134/CTK/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-2013

Umamani Raul, C/O Vs. ITO, Khurda Ward, Khurda Satyabadi Raul, Vill/PO: Siko, Jankia, Dist: Khurda PAN/GIR No.BDAPR 6657 J (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri P.C.Sethi, AR Revenue by : Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR

Date of Hearing : 30/04/ 2019 Date of Pronouncement : 30 /04/ 2019

O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of

the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Bhubaneswar dated

1.12.2016 for the assessment year 2012-13.

In Ground Nos.2 & 3 of appeal, the grievance of the

assessee is that the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), has

passed exparte order without giving proper opportunity to the

assessee.

At the outset, Shri P.C.Sethi, ld counsel for the assessee has

informed that proper opportunity of hearing was not granted and

P a g e 1 | 3

ITA No. 134/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year: 20 12- 201 3

the appeal was decided exparte. He has submitted before me

that if an opportunity of hearing be granted then there will be no

such default in future.

After hearing the rival submissions and perusing the orders

of lower authorities, I observe that the CIT(A) has allowed several

opportunities to the assessee, however, there was non-compliance

which resulted into an exparte order. Now before me, it is

vehemently pleaded that if an opportunity be granted then the

assessee shall fully co-operate and get the appeal decided by ld

CIT(A) at an early date.

Considering the principle of natural justice especially when

the ld counsel for the assessee has tried to demonstrate before

me that he will appear before the CIT(A), I consider it justifiable

to give one more opportunity to this appellant. I have also taken

note of the undertaking given by ld A.R. that this appeal shall be

decided at an early date without taking frivolous adjournments. I,

therefore, direct the assessee and his representative to be present

before the ld CIT(A) within 30 days on receipt of the order of the

Tribunal with necessary evidence so that this appeal can be

decided at an early date. I also further direct the assessee to

appear before the ld CIT(A) suo-moto without waiting for any

notice of hearing. However, ld CIT(A) is at liberty to proceed with

P a g e 2 | 3

ITA No. 134/CT K/ 2017 Asse ssment Year: 20 12- 201 3

the matter as per law. I also consider it appropriate to restore the

matter to the file of the CIT(A) but with imposition of cost of

Rs.10,000/- on the assessee for his conduct before the CIT(A),

which should be deposited on or before 15.5. 2019. The assessee

is further directed to file copy of the challan of deposit of cost

before the CIT(A) as an evidence in compliance of the order of this

Tribunal as well as to file copy of the same to the Tribunal. With

these directions, the appeal of the assessee is restored to the file

of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for

statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 30/04/2019.

(Chandra Mohan Garg) JUDICIALMEMBER Cuttack; Dated 30 /04/209 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The appellant : Umamani Raul, C/O Satyabadi Raul, Vill/PO: Siko, Jankia, Dist: Khurda

The Respondent. ITO, Khurda Ward, Khurda 3. The CIT(A)-1, Bhubaneswar 4. Pr.CIT- 1, Bhubnaneswar 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy// By order

Sr. Pvt.Secretary, ITAT, Cuttack

P a g e 3 | 3

UMAMANI RAUL,KHURDA vs. ITO, KHURDA WARD, KHURDA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments