IBRAHIM V. RAJ,VADODARA vs. ITO, WARD-4(2)(2), VADODARA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found it appropriate to remit the matter back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The assessee should be granted a reasonable opportunity of hearing to present their case.
What were the facts?
The assessee-appellant challenged an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) for assessment year 2011-12. The appellant could not attend the proceedings before the CIT(A), leading to the order being passed without their assistance.
What were the issues?
Whether an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) without affording the assessee a proper opportunity of hearing is sustainable. The need for de novo adjudication by the lower appellate authority.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
ITA No. 858/Ahd/2018 Ibrahim V Raj Vs. ITO Assessment year: 2011-12 Page 1 of 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Coram: Pramod Kumar, AM and Ms. Madhumita Roy, JM] ITA No. 858/Ahd/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Ibrahim V Raj ............…………......Appellant G-11/240, Kumbharwada, Masjid Mohalla, Nizampura, Vadodara [PAN : ADEPR 9254 C] Vs. Income Tax Officer ...........................Respondent Ward-4(2)(2), Vadodara
Appearances by:
MJ Shah for the Appellant Saurabh Singh for the Respondent
Date of concluding the hearing : 22.06.2018 Date of pronouncing the order : 09.07.2018
O R D E R Per Pramod Kumar, AM:
By way of this appeal, the assessee-appellant has challenged correctness of the order dated 26th February, 2018 passed by the by the CIT(A)-4, Vadodara in the matter of assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2011-12.
When this appeal was taken up for hearing, it was noticed that the impugned order dated 26.02.2018 passed by the learned CIT(A) is an ex-parte order and that the appellant could not attend the proceedings before the CIT(A). The impugned order is thus passed without the benefit of assistance by the assessee appellant and the assessee appellant is now in appeal before us.
In response to a question from the Bench, learned Departmental Representative fairly agreed that he has no objection to the matter being remitted to the file of learned CIT(A) for adjudication de novo, after giving yet another reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. We think this is a fair approach and since the learned CIT(A) did not have the benefit of assistance from the assessee appellant, the matter should be remitted to the file of learned CIT(A) for adjudication de novo, after giving yet another opportunity of hearing. In any case, there is no reason for an Appellate Forum being bypassed and the matter being taken up directly before us for adjudication on merits.
ITA No. 858/Ahd/2018 Ibrahim V Raj Vs. ITO Assessment year: 2011-12 Page 2 of 2 4. In view of this discussion and bearing in mind entirety of the case, we deem it fit and proper to remit the matter to the file of learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication and the assessee appellant be given a reasonable opportunity of hearing. We order so.
In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above. Pronounced in the open court today on the 9th July, 2018
Sd/- Sd/-
Ms. Madhumita Roy Pramod Kumar (Judicial Member) (Accountant Member) Ahmedabad, the 9th day of July, 2018 **bt Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) Commissioner (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order TRUE COPY Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad benches, Ahmedabad
Date of dictation: ................covered matter..28.06.2018.... 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member: ... 28.06.2018.... 3. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr. P.S./P.S.: …09.07.2018... 4. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for Pronouncement: ... 09.07.2018.... 5. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk : . 09.07.2018……. 6. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk : ……………………………. 7. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order: …. 8. Date of Despatch of the Order: ………………......
9.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Nirmal Kumar Sharma S/O Ram Swroop Sharma vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 16 Oct 2026
- Sh Umang Uniyal vs. Commissioner Department Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 16 Oct 2026
- Paresh Textiles Prop Paresh Gudhka vs. Superintendent Range Iv Div VBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Palladium Constructions PVT LTD. vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central TaxKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vk Construction vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IiMadras · 15 Oct 2026