Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed appeals against an order for quantum of assessment and penalty for AY 2018-19, passed ex-parte by the CIT(A) because the assessee could not respond to notices. The assessee's counsel sought adjournment for preparing documents and stated that some notices were not received.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the appeals were filed ex-parte and the DR had no objection. Both appeals were remanded back to the CIT(A) to decide afresh after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) was justified, and if the assessee was denied a proper opportunity of hearing. Should the matter be remanded for fresh adjudication?
Sections Cited
143(3), 270A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH
Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & MS.PADMAVATHY S
आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeals have been filed by the assessee against order dated 29/10/2024 for the quantum of assessment passed u/s.143(3) and penalty u/s.270A for the A.Y. 2018-19 passed by NFAC, Delhi.
At the outset ld. Counsel submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has passed exparte order as assessee could not respond to the notices issued.
Before us ld. Counsel submitted that the assessee had sought for adjournment and was undergoing preparation of documents to make effective and proper representations and some of the notices sent were either not reached or missed attention of the assessee sent through ITBA portal.
Since appeals have been filed exparte and ld. DR also does not have any objection, therefore, both the appeals are remanded back to the file of the ld. CIT (A) to decide afresh and in accordance with law after giving due and effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee and assessee is also directed to comply with the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A).
In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 28th February, 2025.