Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal arose from an ex parte order passed by the NFAC Delhi. Notices for hearing were issued during the tax audit and return filing period, and the assessee's request for adjournment was not granted.
Held
The Tribunal held that the appeals should be remitted back to the CIT(A) to pass a detailed order on merits after considering the assessee's submissions and granting a proper opportunity of being heard.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex parte order without providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Sections Cited
154
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “J(SMC
Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI & SMT. RENU JAUHRI
Per: Smt. Beena Pillai, J.M.: The Present appeal filed by the assessee arise out of order dated 13/12/2024 passed by NFAC Delhi for assessment year 2017-18 on following grounds of appeal:
A.Y. 2017-18 Mr. Navin Harilal Minat Partner Shree Chamunda Realty “1. The learned CIT (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre has erred in not dwelling upon the grounds of appeal raised by the appellant on merits on his own, where from the grounds itself it was clear that the rectification order passed u/s 154 was unwarranted
The learned CIT (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre has erred in not giving sufficient opportunity to the appellant by fixing the hearings when the appellant was busy in complying with tax audits & return filing and completing the appellate proceedings in a hasty manner.
The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, and modify the aforesaid grounds of appeal at or any time before the hearing as may be advised from time to time.”
Brief facts of the case are as under:
2. At the outset the Ld.AR submitted that the impugned order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) is an ex parte order. The Ld.AR submitted that the notice for hearing were issued by Ld.CIT(A) during the period 13th September, 2024 to 14th November, 2024. He submitted that, the said period was of tax audit & income tax return filing period. The consultant of the assessee requested for adjournment on the Income Tax portal. However, the Ld.CIT(A) passed impugned order without going into the merits of the case. The Ld.AR thus prayed for an opportunity of being heard on merit. 2.1 The Ld.CIT(A).DR though objected, could not controvert the submissions of Ld.AR. We have produced the submissions advanced by both sides in the light of the records placed before us.
A.Y. 2017-18 Mr. Navin Harilal Minat Partner Shree Chamunda Realty 3.1 Admittedly, the notices were issued by the Ld. CIT(A) during the period when statutory dates for completing tax audit and filing of income tax returns were near. It is also a fact that assessee had filed adjournment letters requesting time which was not granted by the Ld. CIT(A). 3.2 In the interest of justice, this appeal is remitted back to Ld. CIT(A) for passing a detailed order on merits, by considering submissions/evidences filed by the assessee in respect of the claims raised therein. Needless to say that proper opportunity of being heard must be granted process.
Accordingly grounds raised by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 28/02/2025