OLF REALITY & CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 271/CTK/2018Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack27 September 2018AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) should decide appeals on merits even if the assessee fails to appear. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s orders and restored the matters for adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A) on multiple hearing dates, leading to the dismissal of their appeals ex-parte. The assessee sought an adjournment due to pending documents from their previous AR.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without deciding on merits, violating principles of natural justice. Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK

Before: S/SHRI N.S SAINI & PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Appellant: Shri Prachi Saurav Patnaik, AR
For Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, DR
Hearing: 27/09

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK

BEFORE S/SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No.271 & 272/CTK/2018 Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2013-2014

OLF Reality & Construction Vs. ACIT, Corporate Circle 1(2), Pvt Ltd., Plot No.N-5/47, Bhubaneswar. IRC Village, Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar. PAN/GIR No.AABCO 2360 F (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri Prachi Saurav Patnaik, AR Revenue by : Shri Subhendu Datta, DR

Date of Hearing : 27/09/ 2018 Date of Pronouncement : 27 /09/ 2018

O R D E R Per N.S.Saini, AM These are appeals filed by the assessee against the separate

orders of the CIT(A)-1, Bhubaneswar both dated 20.4.2018 for

the assessment years 2011-12 & 2012-13, respectively.

2.

The common grounds taken in both the appeals are as

under:

“1.That the order passed by the Learned CIT(A) is arbitrary, excessive, contrary to facts and bad in law. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(Appeals) has grossly erred in dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant against the order passed by the Ld. Assessing officer u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act,1961.

P a g e 1 | 3

ITA No. 271 & 272/CT K/ 2018 Asse ssment Years : 2 011 -12 & 20 13- 201 4

3.

That the appellant sought adjournment before the Learned CIT(Appeals) because of certain details /documents getting from the previous A.R of the appellant which are required for appeal proceeding. However, the order of dismissing the appeal passed by the learned CIT (Appeals) on 20.04.2018 merely for non-appearance to adjourned date 11.04.2018 is violating the principles of natural justice.”

3.

At the outset, ld A.R. of the assessee submitted that the

assessee failed to put in appearance before the CIT(A) on the

dates of hearing fixed on 23.8.2017, 19.9.2017, 28.9.2017,

1.11.2017, 4.1.2018 and 11.4.2018, therefore, the CIT(A)

dismissed the appeals of the assessee exparte following the

decision of ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India

Ltd., 38 ITR 320 (Del) and Cuttack Bench in the case of M/s. Balaji

Builders in ITA n.79/ctk/2007 order dated 3.12.2008. Hence, he

prayed that one more opportunity should be granted to the

assessee to present its case before the CIT(A). He submitted that

he undertakes before this Bench to appear before the CIT(A) as

and when called upon to do so.

4.

Ld D.R. opposed the submission of ld A.R. of the assessee

5.

After hearing the rival submissions and perusing the orders

of lower authorities, we find that the assessee could not appear on

the dates fixed for hearing by the CIT(A) and hence, the CIT(A)

dismissed the appeals of the assessee exparte without discussing

or deciding the merits of the case. It is a settled position of law

P a g e 2 | 3

ITA No. 271 & 272/CT K/ 2018 Asse ssment Years : 2 011 -12 & 20 13- 201 4

that the CIT(A) should decide the appeals of the assessee on

merits even if the assessee fails to appear on the date of hearing.

Before us, ld A.R. submitted that in one more opportunity is given,

he will appear before the CIT(A). We, therefore, set aside the

orders of ld CIT(A) and restore the matter back to his file to

adjudicate the appeals of the assessee on merits after allowing

reasonable and proper opportunity of hearing to both the parties.

6.

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for

statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 27 /09/2018.

Sd/- sd/- (Pavan Kumar Gadale) (N.S Saini) JUDICIALMEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 27 /09/2018 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : OLF Reality & Construction Pvt Ltd., Plot No.N-5/47, IRC Village, Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar.

2.

The Respondent. ACIT, Corporate Circle 1(2), Bhubaneswar. 3. The CIT(A)-1, Bhubaneswar 4. Pr.CIT-1, Bhubaneswar 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy// By order

Sr. Pvt. Secretary, ITAT, Cuttack

P a g e 3 | 3

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →