BULLE ROHINI KUMAR,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), BANGALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found the assessee's claim of not being given an opportunity justified as the adjournment petition was not considered. Therefore, the case was remitted to the AO for a fresh decision after providing a hearing to the assessee.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed without considering an adjournment request. The assessee claimed the CIT(A) failed to provide an opportunity for a personal hearing and appreciate that accumulated cash was from taxable receipts.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred by not considering the assessee's adjournment request and failing to provide a proper opportunity for hearing, thus violating principles of natural justice.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE
Before: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI
PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) dated 24.3.2022. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-
1. The Ld. CIT appeal has erred in passing the order on the basis of facts and circumstances of the case.
2. The Ld: CIT appeals has not considered the adjournment letter filed by the assesse on dated22.03.2022 online requesting for adjournment of appeal hearing as the concerned authorised representative representing the assesse was out of station and sought time till 5th of April 2022 to appear before Ld. CIT Appeal and submit the assesse case
3. The Ld. CIT appeals has not considered the request of the assesee's AR for personal hearing to explain the facts and circumstances of the case Page 2 of 3 4. The Ld. CIT appeal erred in failing to appreciate that the professional doctor would have received some cash amounts from his patients/clients (diagnostics laboratories) as fees for the services rendered which had got accumulated over a period of time.
The Ld CIT appeal erred in failing to appreciate that the said accumulated cash is out of the taxable receipts already shown in the return of income 6. The order of the Ld. CIT appeals is against the principles of natural justice and equity 7. Your appellant craves leave to add, alter any grounds of appeal at the time of hearing of the appeal.
None appeared before me on behalf of the assessee. Hence, I proceeded to decide the issue after hearing Ld. D.R.
Main grounds of assessee in this appeal are with regard to non- giving of opportunity by Ld. CIT(A) while disposing of the appeal order. In my opinion, the claim of the assessee is justified since the adjournment petition filed by assessee on 22.3.2022 was not considered by Ld. CIT(A), NFAC. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, I remit the entire issue in dispute to the file of AO with opportunity of hearing to the assessee and thereafter decide the issue in accordance with law. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 18th Aug, 2022
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Priya, Townhall Road, Cuttack vs. Superintendent Cuttack- I Range, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bangi Mines And Minerals vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
