What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT held that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without verifying service of notices and without discussing the merits of the case. The tribunal emphasized the principle of 'audi alteram partem' (hear the other side).

The assessee filed a return of income, and the AO made additions, increasing the assessed income significantly. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte due to non-compliance with notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without proper verification of notice service and without deciding on merits. Whether the principle of natural justice was violated.

Shri Sharanjit Singh, Jalandhar vs ITO | ITAT Amritsar 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CAMP BENCH ‘SMC’ AT JALANDHAR

Before: Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’ble

Hearing: 08.01.2019Pronounced: 08.01.2019

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CAMP BENCH ‘SMC’ AT JALANDHAR Before Sh. N. K. Saini, Hon’ble Vice President ITA No.380/Asr./2018 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Sharanjit Singh, Vs Income Tax Officer, S/o Late Sh. Joginder Singh, Ward-III(2), VPO-Nangal Lubana, District Jalandhar-144001 Kapurthala-144631 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ADBPS1292C Assessee by : None Revenue by : Sh. Ved Pal Singh, DR Date of Hearing : 08.01.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 08.01.2019 ORDER

This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 19.10.2016 of ld. CIT(A)-2,Jalandhar. 2. Following grounds have been raised in this appeal: “1. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax(A) fell into grave error in deciding the appeal ex-parte by passing a non-speaking order. 2. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax(A) is not justified in sustaining the addition of Rs.5,11,000/- made by the AO. 3. Any other ground which may be raised at the time of hearing.” 3. During the course of hearing nobody was present on behalf of the assessee. Therefore, the appeal is decided ex-parte after hearing the ld. DR.

ITA No. 380/Asr./2018 2 Sharanjit Singh 4. Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed the return of income on 20.06.2008 declaring an income of Rs.1,53,559/-. Later on, the case was selected for scrutiny. The AO framed the assessment at an income of Rs.6,66,363/- by making the various additions.

Being aggrieved the assessee carried the matter to the ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal ex-parte without discussing the issue on merit. He mentioned that the notices were issued on various dates to the assessee but there was no compliance.

Now the assessee is in appeal. The ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below and further submitted that the assessee was non- cooperative and did not appear before the ld. CIT(A), so there was no alternative except to dismiss the appeal.

I have considered the submissions of the ld. DR and perused the material available on the record. In the present case, it is noticed that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine without discussing the case on merit. He simply stated that the notices were issued to the assessee on various date. However, nowhere it is mentioned that the notices were served upon the assessee. It is well settled that nobody should be condemned unheard as per the maxim “audi alteram partem”. I, therefore, by considering the totality of the facts, deem it appropriate to set aside this case back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

ITA No. 380/Asr./2018 3 Sharanjit Singh 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. (Order Pronounced in the Court on 08/01/2019)

Sd/- (N. K. Saini) VICE PRESIDENT Dated: 08/01/2019 *Subodh* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5.DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

SHRI SHARANJIT SINGH,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD III (2), JALANDHAR

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