SHRI. NIRMAL SINGH THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SHRI. INDERJIT SINGH,NAWANSHAHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NAWASHAHAR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It was held that the order of the CIT(A) was vitiated due to a violation of the principle of natural justice as the assessee was not heard properly.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was filed beyond the prescribed limitation period. The assessee did not appear before the ITAT, and the appeal was decided ex-parte after hearing the Departmental Representative.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal was barred by limitation and whether the CIT(A)'s order violated the principle of natural justice.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “DB”, BENCH AMRITSAR
Before: SHRI N.K. CHOUDHRY, JM & DR. A.L.SAINI, AM
आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A.L. Saini:
The captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year 2009-10, is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Jalandhar, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act) dated 28.01.2019.
The appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2009-10 is barred by limitation by 195 days. The assessee filed a petition for condonation of delay requesting the Bench to condone the delay. We have heard both the parties on this preliminary issue and
ITA No.654/ASR/2019 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Sh. Nirmal Singh having regard to the reasons given in the petition for condonation of delay we condone the delay and admit the appeal of assessee for hearing.
At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee in spite of issuance of notice for hearing more than one occasion and ld. Departmental Representative (DR) was present for the appellant Revenue. In the absence of any appearance by the assessee, the appeal is being disposed off ex-parte qua the assessee, after hearing ld. DR for the Revenue on merits in terms of Rule 24 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963.
At the outset itself, we note that the assessee could not plead his case before ld. CIT(A) and the order being an ex-parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of principle of natural justice. We are of the view that in the interest of justice, another opportunity to contest the appeal before the ld. first appellate authority may be granted to the assessee.
We have heard ld. DR for the Revenue and perused the material available on record. We note that the ld. CIT(A) did not consider the assessment records while adjudicating the issue. We note that the ld. CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits based on the material available before him hence it is a violation of principle of natural justice. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. ld. DR for the revenue did not have any objection if the matter is remitted back to the file of ld. CIT(A). Therefore, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
ITA No.654/ASR/2019 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Sh. Nirmal Singh 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Court on 25.11.2019 Sd/- Sd/- (N.K. CHOUDHRY) (A.L.SAINI) "या�यकसद�य / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखासद�य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AmritsarAmritsar *दनांक/ Date: 25/11/2019 (BCG, PS)
Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Sh. Nirmal Singh, Through Legal Heir Sh. Inderjit Singh, VPO Barnala Kalan, Nawanshahr, Punjab-144 514. 2. ITO, Nawanshahr, Punjab. 3. C.I.T(A)-1, Jalandhar. 4. C.I.T.- concerned. 5. The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T., Amritsar.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Suryansh Chawda vs. The State Of Madhya PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Yash Shilawat vs. State Bank Of INDIAMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Pushpa Devi Verma vs. State Bank Of INDIA Through Its Chief ManagerMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Ayan Khan vs. Bandhan BankMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026