What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's plea for a fresh hearing and, in the interest of justice, remitted the matter back to the CIT(A). The assessee was cautioned to cooperate in future proceedings.

The assessee appealed an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) for AY 2007-08, arguing that they were not given a proper opportunity to be heard. The Revenue contended that multiple opportunities were provided, but the assessee failed to appear.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee. Whether the appeal should be remitted for a fresh hearing.

A.Mahender Reddy, Warangal vs ITO | ITAT Hyderabad 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCH “A-SMC”, HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY

For Appellant: Smt. S. Sandhya

Hearing: 16/12/2019Pronounced: 16/12/2019

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “A-SMC”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1095/Hyd/2018 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Sri A. Mahender Reddy, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Warangal. Ward-2, PAN: AFTPA 9979 G Warangal. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Smt. S. Sandhya Revenue by: Sri M.H. Naik, DR Date of hearing: 16/12/2019 Date of pronouncement: 16/12/2019 ORDER This appeal is filed by the assessee against the orders of the Ld. CIT(A)-10, Hyderabad in appeal No. 0334/CIT(A)-10/2015-16, dated 26/3/2018 passed U/s. 143(3) r.w.s 250(6) of the Act for the A.Y. 2007- 08

The assessee has raised the following grounds in his appeal:

“1. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is erroneous both on facts and in law. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have provided opportunity to the appellant by issue of notice to him directly. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 14,67,502/- made by the A.O. disbelieving the sources for deposits made into Karur Vysya Bank A/c. No. 145155000052067. 4. Any other ground or grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing.”

At the outset, the Ld. AR submitted before us that the Ld. CIT (A) has passed ex-parte order without providing proper opportunity to the assessee of being heard. It was therefore pleaded that the matter may be remitted back to the file of the Ld CIT (A) in order to provide one more opportunity to the assessee to pursue the appeal. Ld. DR, on the other hand, vehemently opposed to the submissions of the Ld. AR and argued that several opportunities had been provided to the assessee however, on the given dates of hearing, neither the assessee nor his Representative appeared before the Ld. CIT (A). It was further submitted that the Ld. CIT (A) had no other option but to pass ex-parte order based on the materials available on record. Hence, it was pleaded that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) does not call for any interference and appeal of the assessee may be dismissed.

I have heard the rival submissions and carefully perused the materials on record. On examining the facts of the case, I find merit in the submissions of the Ld. DR. The Ld. CIT (A) had posted the case on four occasions i.e., 17/11/2015, 14/12/2015, 18/1/2018 and finally on 05/03/2018. However, none appeared on behalf of the assessee before the CIT(A) on the abovementioned dates of hearing. Therefore, the Ld. CIT (A) was left with no other option except to adjudicate the appeal ex-parte. In this situation, I do not find much strength in the arguments advanced by the ld. AR. However, considering the prayer of

the Ld. AR, and in the interest of justice, I hereby remit the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT (A) in order to consider the appeal afresh by providing one more opportunity to the assessee of being heard. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate before the Ld. CIT (A) in the proceedings failing which the Ld. CIT (A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits based on the materials on the record. It is ordered accordingly.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove.

Pronounced in the open Court on 16th December, 2019.

Sd/- (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 16th December, 2019 OKK Copy to:- 1) Sri A. Mahender Reddy, H.No. 11-18-222, Kashibugga, Warangal. 2) Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Ayakar Bhavan, Opp. Railway Station, Warangal. 3) The CIT(A)-10, Hyderabad 4) The Pr. CIT-3,Hyderabad 5) The DR, ITAT, Hyderabad 6) Guard File

A.MAHENDER REDDY,WARANGAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, WARANGAL

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments