What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee had filed adjournment applications with reasons, but these were not taken cognizance of by the CIT(A). Therefore, in the interest of substantial justice, the matter was remitted back.

The assessee's appeal against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) was heard. The assessee claimed that their adjournment applications filed on the IT portal were not considered.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without considering the assessee's adjournment applications filed on the IT portal.

Manohar Jalamdan Achalavat vs ITO | ITAT Mumbai 2022

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM & SHRI M. BALAGANESH, AM

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Parikh, Ld. AR, Shri U. R. Singh, Ld. DR

For Respondent: Shri U. R. Singh, Ld. DR

O R D E R

Per Amit Shukla, Judicial Member:

The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against the impugned order dated 29.04.2022, passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the quantum of assessment passed u/s 143(3) for AY 2012-13.

Assessee is aggrieved by ex-parte order passed by First Appellate Authority. Ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that assessee has filed adjournment application on the IT portal which has not been considered and Ld. CIT(A) has passed the ex-parte order. In support of it, he has filed the copy of screen shot for adjournment sought on various dates. Therefore, the matter should be restored back to decide the issue on merits.

On the other hand, Ld. DR also submitted that the matter should be restored back to the file of Ld. First Appellate Authority.

After hearing both the parties and on perusal of the impugned order, we find that Ld. First Appellate Authority has stated that despite multiple opportunity to file the written submission, assessee has failed to comply the same. Accordingly, he has proceeded to decide this issue ex-parte.

On the basis of material available on record and from the perusal of the screen shot as given in the paper book, we find that assessee has filed adjournment application on IT portals seeking adjournment on 15.02.2020, 13.01.2020 and 07.03.2020. However,

3 Shri Manohar J. Achlavat it appears that Ld. First Appellate Authority has not taken cognizance of such adjournment application which assessee has given reasons for not able to file the written submission. Accordingly, in the interest of substantial justice, we are remitting the matter and the grounds raised before us to the file of Ld. First Appellate Authority to decide the issue afresh and in accordance with law, after giving due and effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

MANOHAR JALAMDAN ACHALAVAT,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 22(2)(2), MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments