SRI ROSHAN LAL AGARWALA,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, KOLKATA

ITSSA 75/KOL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 June 2023AY 2011-122 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that in the interest of justice and fair play, the assessee deserved one more opportunity to defend their case on merits before the CIT(A). The Tribunal observed that the assessee's appeals were decided ex parte due to their failure to appear on the scheduled hearing dates. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the orders of the CIT(A) and restored all the appeals to the file of the CIT(A). The directions were to decide the appeals on merits after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The Tribunal also directed the assessee to cooperate diligently in the disposal of these appeals. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sri Roshan Lal Agarwala, filed four appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) against separate orders of the CIT(A)-21, Kolkata, for Assessment Years (AYs) 2011-12, 2013-14, 2015-16, and 2016-17. The appeals were consolidated for hearing due to common grounds and identical facts. The assessee's counsel stated that the CIT(A) decided the appeals ex parte because the assessee could not appear on multiple hearing dates, attributing this to non-receipt of notices. The assessee requested one more opportunity to defend the case on merits before the CIT(A). The Revenue's counsel objected, citing the assessee's failure to appear despite several opportunities.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessee is entitled to an opportunity to present their case on merits before the CIT(A) when the appeals were decided ex parte due to the assessee's non-appearance, allegedly caused by non-receipt of notices? (Question of mixed law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the CIT(A) orders were passed ex parte due to non-receipt of notices, preventing them from appearing and defending their case. They prayed for restoration of the appeals to the CIT(A)'s file to allow them a chance to argue on merits. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue objected to the assessee's request, stating that the assessee had been granted several opportunities to appear but failed to do so, and therefore, the request should be dismissed.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Hearing: 26.06.2023Pronounced: 27.06.2023

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member]

I.T(SS).A. Nos. 75 to 78/Kol/2023 Assessment Years: 2011-12, 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17 Sri Roshan Lal Agarwala Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, C/o, M/s. Salarpuria Jajodia & Co., 7, Central Circle-4(4), Kolkata. C. R. Avenue, 3rd Floor, Kolkata- 700072. (PAN: ACSPA4667P) Appellant Respondent

Date of Hearing 26.06.2023 Date of Pronouncement 27.06.2023 For the Appellant Shri S. Jhajharia, AR For the Respondent Shri Abhijit Kundu, CIT, DR

ORDER Per Bench : All these four appeals preferred by the assessee against the separate orders of Ld.CIT(A)-21, Kolkata dated 28.02.2023 for AYs 2011-12, 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2016-17. Since in all the appeals grounds are common and facts are identical, we dispose of all the appeals by a consolidated order for the sake of convenience.

At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has decided the appeals ex parte as the assessee could not appear on the various occasions when the Ld. CIT(A) fixed the appeals for hearing. The Ld. Counsel submitted that the notices sent by the Ld. CIT(A) were not received by the assessee and, therefore, all these appeals of the assessee remained unattended before the Ld. CIT(A). The ld. Counsel of the assessee prayed before the Bench that the assessee may kindly be given one more opportunity to defend his case on merit before the Ld.CIT(A) by restoring all these appeals to the file of the Ld. CIT(A).

The Ld. D.R, on the other hand, strongly objected the prayers of the Ld. A.R by submitting that despite several opportunities granted the assessee did not appear and, therefore, the said request of the counsel of the assessee may kindly be dismissed.

IT(SS)A Nos. 75 to 78/Kol/2023 Sri Roshan Lal Agarwala, AYs 2011-12, 2013-14,2015-16 & 2016-17 4. After hearing the rival parties and perusing the material on record, we observe that all the assessee's appeals were decided ex-parte when the assessee failed to turn up on the dates fixed for hearings and now, therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, the assessee deserves to be given one more opportunity to defend his case before the Ld. CIT(A) on merits. Accordingly, we set aside the orders of Ld. CIT(A) and restore all the appeals to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with the directions to decide the same on merits by affording the assessee reasonable opportunity of hearing. Simultaneously we also direct the assessee to cooperate in the disposal of these appeals diligently.

In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 27th June, 2023 Sd/- Sd/- (Sonjoy Sarma) (Rajesh Kumar) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 27th June, 2023 JD, Sr. PS

Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant– 2. Respondent . 3. CIT(A)-21, Kolkata. 4. CIT, Kolkata. 5. DCIT, C.C.4(4), Kolkata. , 6. DR, ITAT, Kolkata, (sent through e-mail). True Copy By Order

Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Bench, Kolkata

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →