Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was against an ex-parte order by the NFAC, Delhi, for AY 2022-23. The assessee alleged that their submissions were not considered and that they were not given adequate opportunity or time for hearings and assessment.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution. However, it was held that the CIT(A) should have provided a reasonable opportunity of being heard and decided the appeal on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without considering the assessee's submissions and granting adequate opportunities for hearing and assessment.
Sections Cited
143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE & SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE
O R D E R
PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM:
This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order dated 08/08/2024 by the NFAC, Delhi, [hereinafter ‘the ld. CIT(A)’], pertaining to AY 2022-23.
The grievance of the assessee reads as under:- “1. On the facts and under the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order without considering the submissions filed by the Appellant on the e-filing portal. 2. On the facts and under the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in holding that no adjournment has been filed to the notices whereas the appellant has filed an adjournment to all the notices issued. 3. On the facts and under the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in recognizing the fact that insufficient time was given to the assessee at the time of assessment by the learned Assessing officer before finalizing the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act.
2 4. On the facts and under the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) has erred in making an addition of Rs. 73,84,072/- as estimated taxable income on ad-hoc basis and the reasons assigned for doing so are wrong and contrary to the facts and the provision of the law. 5. The appellant craves leaves to add, alter, amend, modify, or withdraw ground of appeal on or before the date of hearing.”