What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the assessee's reason for non-appearance to be genuine and noted that the CIT(A) orders were not passed on merits. To ensure substantial justice, the cases were remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

The assessee failed to participate in appellate proceedings before the CIT(A) due to personal differences with their counsel, resulting in ex-parte orders. The assessee submitted an affidavit to support this claim.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee's non-appearance before the CIT(A) due to counsel issues warrants a remand for a fresh decision on merits.

M/S Punjab Agro Industries… vs DCIT | s.250(6) | ITAT Amritsar 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR

Before: SH. SANJAY ARORA & SH. N.K.CHOUDHRY

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE SH. SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. N.K.CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.653(ASR)/2018 Assessment Year:2010-11 And ITA No.213(ASR)/2019 Assessment Year:2011-12 And SA No.04(ASR)/2019 Assessment Year:2010-11 And SA No.10(ASR)/2019 Assessment Year: 2011-12

M/s Punjab Agro Industries, Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Faridkot Road, Guruharsahay Income-tax, Circle – 1, [PAN:AAFFP2814A] Ferozpur

(Appellant) (Respondent)

Appellant by : Sh. Ashray Sarna (Ld. AR) Respondent by : Sh. Charan Dass (Ld. DR) Date of hearing : 28- 05-2019 Date of pronouncement: 30-05-2019

ORDER PER N.K.CHOUDHRY, JM:

These Appeals and stay Applications have been preferred by the assessee against the orders dated 17.10.2018 and 15.02.2019 relevant for the Assessment Years 2010-11 and2011-12 respectively passed by the ld. CIT (A), Bathinda u/s 250(6) of the Income-tax act 1961 (hereinafter called

as the Act) whereby, the ld. CIT (A) has affirmed the assessment orders passed under 143(3)/148 of the Act.

At the outset, it was submitted by the ld. A.R. of the assessee that though during the assessment proceedings, the ld. counsel of the Asseeee duly co-operated, however during the course appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT (A), due to some personal differences with the counsel, the Assessee could not participate which resulted into passing of ex-parte order by the ld. CIT (A). It was further submitted that since the assesse failed to participate in the appellate proceedings due to aforesaid reason, therefore, one opportunity may be granted to the Assessee to participate in the appellate proceedings before ld. CIT (A).

On the contrary, the ld. D.R. objected to the stand of the assesse and submitted that the ld. CIT (A) has passed the orders on merit,thereforethe assessee is not entitled for any relief as prayed for.

Having heard the parties and perusal the material available on record including the orders impugned herein. The Asseeee has claimed that due to personal differences with its counsel, the assessee could not participate in the appellate proceedings. The assesse in support of its contention/claim also file affidavit duly sworn. We also realize from the orders, that the ld. CIT (A) due to non-appearance of the assessee, passed the order as ex- parte but not on merits. In our considered view, under the reason for non- appearance and non-participation with appellate proceedings, seems to be quite genuine and therefore, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances that orders under challenge have also not been passed on merit, to meet substantial justice, it would be appropriate to remand back the cases to the files of the ld. CIT (A) for decisions afresh, suffice to say while affording due opportunities of being heard to the assessee. Consequently the orders under challenge are set aside and the cases are

remanded to the file of the ld. CIT (A) for decision afresh. We feel it appropriate to clarify that the assesse shall co-operate with the appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT (A) and will appear as and when required and in case of further default, the ld. CIT (A) shall be at liberty to draw the adverse inferenceif any, against the assessee.

Stay applications nos. 04(ASR)/2019 and 5. 10(ASR)/2019

In view of the order passed in quantum appeals, the stay applications stands dismissed on becoming infructuous.

RESULT:

In the result, the appeals of the assesse stands allowed for statistical purposes and Stay Application dismissed being infructuous.

Order pronounced on 30th Day of May 2019.

Sd/- Sd/- (SANJAY ARORA) (N.K.CHOUDHRY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 30.05.2019 /PK/ Ps. Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) Appellant/Assessee (2) Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle – 1, Ferozpur (3) The CIT(A)-Bathinda (4) The CIT concerned (5) The SR DR, I.T.A.T., Amritsar True copy By order

M/S PUNJAB AGRO INDUSTRIES,GURUHARSAHAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, FEROZPUR

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