KONDAL RAO KURMAYAGARI,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(5), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 852/HYD/2019Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 November 2019AY 2009-103 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) should have decided the appeal on merits rather than passing an ex-parte order. The matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) to decide the appeal afresh on merits, providing one more opportunity to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A). The assessee claimed they did not receive proper notice and were not afforded an opportunity of hearing. The CIT(A) had listed the case for hearing on multiple occasions, but the assessee did not appear.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee and without deciding the appeal on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147,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.852/Hyd/2019 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Sri Kondal Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer, Kurmayagari, Ward-11(5), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. PAN: AGWPK 0763 E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: None Revenue by: Sri Mookambikeyan S - 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)-1, Hyderabad in appeal No.0115/2016-17/ITO, Ward- 11(5)/CIT(A)-1/Hyd/2018-19, dated 12/3/2019 passed U/s. 144 r.w.s 147 & U/s. 250(6) of the Act for the A.Y. 2009-10.

2.

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 appellate decision of the CIT(A) is in violation of principles of natural justice, inasmuch as the assessee was not afforded proper opportunity of hearing inasmuch as the notice of hearing said to have been sent by e-mail was not received by the assessee.

3.

The CIT(A) ought to have decided the appeal on merits as the additions of Rs. 10,00,000/- made was ex-parte, even without examining the material available on record. 4. The appellant crave leave to add or amend or alter any of the grounds at the time of hearing of the appeal.”

3.

At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. However, considering the issues involved in the appeal and the ex-parte order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) inlimine and not on merits, I am of the considered view that the matter is required to be remitted back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the appeal on merits.

4.

Further, on perusing the Order of the Ld. CIT (A) it is apparent that the Ld. CIT (A) had posted the case on several occasions ie., 22/5/2017, 05/07/2017, 25/09/2017, 24/10/2017, 04/12/2017, 07/03/2018, 30/08/2018, 05/09/2018 and finally on 11/03/2019. However, none appeared on behalf of the assessee on the above- mentioned 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 before the Ld. A.O. also. However, in my considered view the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have disposed off the appeal on merits based on the materials on record. In this situation, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, 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.

5.

In the result, 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 Kondal Rao Kurmayagari, H.No.5-3-92, Kukatpally, Hyderabad-500072. 2) Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(5), R.No.1010, 10th Floor, Signature Towers, Kondapur, Hyderabad-084. 3) The CIT(A)-1, Hyderabad 4) The Pr. CIT-5, Hyderabad 5) The DR, ITAT, Hyderabad 6) Guard File

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →