What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found sufficient cause for the assessee's non-appearance before the CIT(A). The ex-parte order was set aside, and the issues were restored to the CIT(A)'s file for fresh adjudication.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte because notices were returned as 'assessee has left the address' due to a transfer. The assessee argued this was due to a change of residence and requested the order be set aside.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) was justified, given the circumstances of the assessee's non-appearance due to a change of address.

Shri Bharat Kumar Raigr, Lucknow vs Income Tax Oficer Ward 5(1)… | ITAT Amritsar 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR ‘SMC’ BENCH, AMRITSAR

Before: SH. B. R. BASKARAN

Hearing: 29.08.2019Pronounced: 30.08.2019

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR ‘SMC’ BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

I.T.A. No. 139/Asr/2018 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Bharat Kumar Raigar vs. Income Tax Officer, C-2/BPCL Housing Complex, Ward 5(1), Amritsar Sector 21, Indira Nagar, Lucknow [PAN: AENPR 0718P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

Appellant by : Sh. Ashwani Kalia (C.A.) Respondent by: Sh. Amar Pal Meena (D.R.) Date of Hearing: 29.08.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 30.08.2019

ORDER Per B. R. Baskaran, Accountant Member: The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 30-01-2018 passed by Ld CIT(A)-2, Amritsar and it relates to the assessment year 2012-13.

The Ld counsel for the assessee submitted that the Ld CIT(A) has passed the impugned order ex-parte, without presence of the assessee, since the notices issued by him were returned back by the post office with the noting that assessee has left the address. The Ld AR submitted that the assessee is an employee and he had been transferred at the point of time from Amritsar. Hence he had vacated the house and accordingly the notices were returned back with the noting that the addressee has left. However, the office of Ld CIT(A) kept sending the notices to

2 ITA No. 139/Asr/2018 (AY 2012-13) Bharat Kumar Raigar v. ITO the very same address and the subsequent notices were also returned back with the same reasoning. Accordingly the Ld AR submitted that there is sufficient cause for the assessee in not appearing before Ld CIT(A). Accordingly he prayed that the order passed by Ld CIT(A) may be set aside and all the issues interested in the appeal may be restored to the file of the Ld CIT(A).

I heard the Ld DR and perused the record. Having regard to the submissions made by the Ld AR, I am of the view that there is sufficient cause for the assessee in not appearing before Ld CIT(A). I noticed that the Ld CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in limine without adjudicating the issue on merits. Accordingly I find merit in the prayer of Ld A.R. Accordingly, I set aside the order passed by Ld CIT(A) and restore all the issues to his file for adjudicating them afresh after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on August 30, 2019 Sd/- (B. R. Baskaran) Accountant Member Date: 30.08.2019 /GP/Sr. Ps. Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Appellant: (2) The Respondent: (3) The CIT(Appeals) (4) The CIT concerned (5) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T True Copy By Order

SHRI BHARAT KUMAR RAIGR,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFICER WARD 5(1), AMRITSAR

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments