What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had violated the principle of natural justice by deciding the appeal without considering the assessee's rejoinder to the remand report. The case was restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed without affording a proper opportunity to comment on the Assessing Officer's remand report. The assessee argued that the principle of natural justice was violated.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) violated the principle of natural justice by dismissing the appeal without allowing the assessee to file a rejoinder to the remand report.

Ajay Kumar, Gaya vs ITO | ITAT Patna 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PATNA BENCH, PATNA

Before: SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG & LAXMI PRASAD SAHU

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Rastogi, AR

For Respondent: Shri Supriya Biswas, DR

Hearing: 17/06Pronounced: 17/06

Per C.M.Garg, JM This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of

the CIT(A)-1, Patna dated 25.5.2018 for the assessment year

2010-2011.

In Ground Nos.1 & 2 of appeal, the grievance of the

assessee is that the CIT(A) is not justified in dismissing the appeal

of the assessee without allowing reasonable opportunity to the

assessee to make the comment on the remand report of the

Assessing officer.

P a g e 1 | 4

At the time of hearing, Learned A.R. of the assessee

submitted that the CIT(A) has not afforded proper opportunity of

hearing to the assessee and also to give rejoinder on the remand

report of the Assessing officer. Hence, he requested that the

matter be remanded to the file of the CIT(A) to readjudicate the

appeal of the assessee afresh after allowing reasonable

opportunity to the assessee. Ld A.R. of the assessee before us

submitted that if one more opportunity is granted, then the case

shall be properly represented before the CIT(A) without any fail or

adjournment.

Reply to above, Ld D.R. supported the orders of the lower

authorities.

We have perused the relevant materials on record, inter

alia, assessment order and first appellate order. The main

grievance of the assessee is that the CIT(A) has violated the

principle of natural justice by not giving opportunity to the

assessee to give rejoinder to the remand report submitted by the

Assessing Officer. On perusal of the impugned order, we find that

the CIT(A) has relied on the report of the Assessing Officer dated

24.11.2017 and dated of the JCIT dated 16.5.2018. We also

noted that the assessee requested the CIT(A) to allow to furnish

P a g e 2 | 4 the rejoinder to the remand report. However, without waiting the

rejoinder to the remand report, the CIT(A) decided the appeal, as

is evident from para 3.4 of the CIT(A). Hence, we are of the

considered vide that the order of the CIT(A) is against the

principle of natural justice. Therefore, we restore the appeal

again to the file of the CIT(A) to allow the assessee to file the

rejoinder and then decide the appeal of the assessee on merits.

Since, we have restored the case to the CIT(A) to decide the

issue afresh after considering the rejoinder to the remand report,

therefore, other grounds of appeal on merits have become

infructuous and also not adjudicated upon.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

purposes.

Order pronounced on 17/06/2019.

Sd/- sd/- (Laxmi Prasad Sahu) (Chandra Mohan Garg) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIALMEMBER

Patna; Dated 17 /06/209 B.K.Parida, SPS

P a g e 3 | 4 Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Ajay Kumar, Prop. M/s. Gautam Bhandar, Hate Godown, Gaya- 823001

The Respondent. ITO, Ward 3(1), Gaya 3. The CIT(A)-, Patna 4. Pr.CIT- patna 5. DR, ITAT, Patna 6. Guard file. //True Copy//

By order

Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Patna

P a g e 4 | 4

AJAY KUMAR,GAYA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), GAYA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Latest GST High Court judgments