LATA BALARAM GAIKWAD,MAHARASHTRA vs. ITO WARD 3(5) KALYAN, MAHARASHTRA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6887/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2025AY 2014-15Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member), MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL ( (Judicial Member)5 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged that the CIT(A) order was passed ex-parte and, in the interest of substantial justice, set aside the order. The matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication, with a direction to provide the assessee with a reasonable opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) in an ex-parte order due to non-compliance with notices. The assessee's Chartered Accountant failed to inform the assessee or file submissions, leading to the ex-parte order. The assessee sought a fresh opportunity to present its case.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in passing an ex-parte order without providing a reasonable opportunity to the assessee to present its case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL

For Appellant: Mr. Prashant Shinkar
For Respondent: Ms. Deepa Hiray, Sr. DR
Hearing: 01/05/2025Pronounced: 05/05/2025

This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 15.12.2023 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2014-15, raising following grounds: 1. “On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned C.I.T. (A) erred in dismissing the appeal.

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned C.I.T. (A) erred in dismissing the appeal and that too without even appreciating the facts and the circumstance of the case fully and properly.

3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned C.I.T. (A) erred in approving the action of the A.O. in making an addition of an amount of Rs.3,11,86,365/- as Long term capital gains income. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and/or delete any or all of the grounds of appeal

at any time.”

2. At the threshold, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee has submitted that the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) was rendered ex-parte qua the assessee, owing to non-compliance with the notices issued by the first appellate authority. It is submitted that, in the appeal filed in Form No. 35 before the learned CIT(A), the email address of the Chartered Accountant representing the assessee was furnished for the purpose of official communication. However, the said Chartered Accountant, for reasons not disclosed, neither informed the assessee of the notices received nor filed any written submissions or representations before the appellate authority. Consequently, the assessee became aware of the non compliance of notices only upon its receipt of impugned order. It is further submitted that the assessee is now willing and prepared to submit a proper explanation on the issues in dispute and to participate fully in the proceedings before the appellate authority, should an opportunity be granted by restoring the matter.

3.

We have heard the rival submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. It is noted that, as per paragraph 5 of the impugned order, the learned CIT(A) had issued notices on 28.12.2020, 09.11.2023, 01.12.2023, and 08.12.2023. These notices, spanning a brief interval of approximately two months, elicited no response from the assessee, and the appellate order was consequently passed ex-parte. Having regard to the circumstances of the case and in the interest of substantial justice, we are of the considered view that one further opportunity ought to be afforded to the assessee to present its case. Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) is set aside, and the matter is remanded to the said authority for de novo adjudication. The learned CIT(A) shall provide the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard before deciding the matter afresh. It shall be incumbent upon the assessee to respond diligently to all notices issued, whether through email or by any other mode permissible under the provisions of the Act. The ground No. 2 of appeal is allowed and other grounds on merits are not adjudicated.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 05/05/2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →