LAXMI DEVI MOHATA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(2)(3), SURAT

ITA 455/SRT/2018Status: DisposedITAT Surat11 January 2019AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT set aside the impugned ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A). The Tribunal found that in the peculiar facts of the case, the assessee was not provided with an effective opportunity of being heard, as the date of hearing was admittedly a public holiday. Furthermore, the Tribunal noted that the disposal of the appeal in an ex-parte manner was not in terms of the statutory requirements. Specifically, the Tribunal referred to Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which mandates the Commissioner (Appeals) to dispose of the appeal by stating points for determination, the decision thereon, and the reasons for the decision. The CIT(A) had not followed this statutory mandate. Accepting the oral undertaking of the assessee's counsel, the Tribunal remanded the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to pass a speaking order in accordance with law, ensuring the assessee is afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The Tribunal also cautioned that if the assessee abuses the trust, the CIT(A) would be at liberty to pass an order based on the material on record. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Laxmi Devi Mohata, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Surat Bench, against an ex-parte order dated 11.05.2018 passed by the CIT(A)-2, Surat, for Assessment Year 2014-15. The CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal without hearing the appellant, citing the assessee's failure to appear on 30.04.2018 and seeking an adjournment. The assessee contended that the adjournment was sought due to the departure of their accountant and a change in Chartered Accountant, and that the hearing date of 30.04.2018 was a public holiday. The Revenue did not object to the assessee's prayer.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the ex-parte appeal order passed by the CIT(A) is wrong and bad-in-law as it was passed without hearing the appellant? (Question of law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice). 2. Whether the ex-parte appeal order passed by the CIT(A) dismissing the appeal is wrong and bad-in-law as it was passed without considering the assessee's submissions and contentions? (Question of law and fact, concerning procedural fairness). 3. Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) is wrong and bad-in-law as it was passed without deciding the grounds of appeal on merits based on available material? (Question of law and fact, concerning statutory compliance). Assessee's Contentions: The assessee argued that the ex-parte order was bad-in-law as it was passed without a proper hearing. The adjournment was sought due to unavoidable circumstances (accountant leaving, change of CA). The last hearing date was a public holiday. The assessee relied on an order in ITA No.48/CHD/2018 for AY 2011-12. The assessee prayed for the impugned order to be set aside to enable participation in proceedings. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue did not object to the assessee's prayer.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT BENCH, SURAT

Before: SMT. DIVA SINGH & SHRI O.P.MEENA

Hearing: 11.01.2019

PER DIVA SINGH, JM:

1.

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 11.05.2018 of CIT(A)-2, Surat pertaining to 2014-15 assessment year on various ground on merit including the following 3 ground reproduced as under : “ 1) That the ex-parte appeal order passed by ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] is wrong and bad-in-law as the same has been passed wit

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →