LAKSHMINARAYAN KAKANI,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(3), HYDERABAD

ITA 1168/HYD/2019Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 November 2019AY 2016-174 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's plea for a fresh opportunity, despite the Revenue's arguments. The matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits, with a caution to the assessee for future compliance.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-appearance. The assessee contended that proper notices were not served and the CIT(A) failed to verify records. The Revenue argued that multiple opportunities were given and the dismissal was justified.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without proper verification of service of notices and assessment records. Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY

Hearing: 06/11/2019Pronounced: 06/11/2019

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “A-SMC”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1168/Hyd/2019 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sri Lakshminarayan Kakani, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Flat No. 610, 6th Floor, Ward-7(3), Babukhan Estate, Signature Towers, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad-01. Kondapur, Hyderabad-084. PAN: AAAHL 6207 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri A.V. Raghuram Revenue by: Sri Mookambikeyan, DR Date of hearing: 06/11/2019 Date of pronouncement: 06/11/2019 ORDER

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-3, Hyderabad in appeal No.10213/ITO-7(3)/Hyd/CIT(A)- 3/2018-19, dated 20/05/2019 passed U/s. 143(3) r.w.s 250(6) of the Act for the A.Y. 2016-17.

The assessee has raised the following grounds in his appeal:-

“1. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) dismissing the appeal for non- appearance is not only erroneous both on facts and in law but is perverse. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have verifi8ed service of hearing notices before holding that the assessee is not interested in pursuing the appeal and thereby erred in dismissing the appeal.

The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that even when appeal is decided ex-parte, is required to verify the grounds with reference to the assessment records and thereby erred in dismissing the appeal without verifying the assessment records. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the A.O. has held that an amount of Rs. 77,02,51,912 is not shown as purchases / sales of the transaction or offered any capital gain though states that the assessee filed profit and loss statement which contained the above amount as purchases and arriving of profit is there in that statement, thus erred in dismissed the appeal holding the order of the A.O. to be correct.”

At the outset, the Ld. AR briefly narrated the facts of the case and submitted that the Ld. CIT (A) has passed ex-parte order without providing an 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. A.O. as well as 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) is in order 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 several occasions. However, none appeared on behalf of the assessee before the CIT(A) on the dates of hearing. Therefore, the Ld. CIT (A) was left with no other option except to adjudicate the appeal ex-parte. It is further observed that there was no compliance even before the Ld. A.O. 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, 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 on merits 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, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove.

Pronounced in the open Court on 06th November, 2019.

Sd/- (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 06th November, 2019 OKK

Copy to:- 1) Sri Lakshminarayan Kakani, Flat No.610, 6 th Floor, Babukhan Estate, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad – 500 001. 2) Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(3), Signature Towers, Kondapur, Hyderabad – 084. 3) The CIT(A)-3, Hyderabad 4) The Pr. CIT-3, Hyderabad 5) The DR, ITAT, Hyderabad 6) Guard File

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →