SHEFIELD TECHNOPLAST PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE JT. CIT, TDS RANGE, VADODARA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1494/AHD/2017Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 July 2018AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT set aside the CIT(A)'s ex parte order and restored the matter back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The assessee was granted a reasonable opportunity to present their defense.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal against a penalty order was heard ex parte by the CIT(A) as the assessee was absent. The ITAT noted that the CIT(A) passed the order without giving the assessee a proper opportunity to present their case.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex parte order without providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA

For Appellant: Smt. Divya Rahi, A.R, Shri Saurabh Singh, Sr. D.R

आदेश/O R D E R

PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA - AM:

The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the CIT(A)-1, Vadodara (‘CIT(A)’ in short), dated 01.03.2017 arising in the penalty order dated 30.09.2015 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s. 271C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning assessment year 2015-16.

ITA No. 1494/Ahd/17 [Shefield Technoplast Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Jt.CIT] A.Y. 2015-16 - 2 - 2. The assessee has taken several grounds of appeal seeking to challenge the order of the CIT(A). However, on perusal of the order of the CIT(A), we notice that the CIT(A) has passed the order ex parte in the absence of the assessee. Therefore, we consider it appropriate that a reasonable opportunity is given to the assessee to place its defense before the CIT(A) to enable the First Appellate Authority to pass speaking order after taking cognizance of the merits of the case as may be advanced on behalf of the assessee. Therefore, we consider it appropriate to set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore all the issues back to the file of the CIT(A) in larger interest of justice with a view to enable the assessee to avail opportunity once more. Needless to say, the assessee shall fully co-operate with the proceedings before CIT(A) without any demur, failing which, the CIT(A) shall be at liberty to conclude the appellate proceedings in accordance with law. Hence, the order of the CIT(A) is set aside and all the issues raised in the captioned appeal are restored back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

3.

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

This Order pronounced in Open Court on 05/07/2018

Sd/- Sd/- (MADHUMITA ROY) (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 05/07/2018 True Copy S. K. SINHA आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. राज�व / Revenue 2. आवेदक / Assessee 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT

ITA No. 1494/Ahd/17 [Shefield Technoplast Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Jt.CIT] A.Y. 2015-16 - 3 - 4. आयकर आयु�त- अपील / CIT (A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाइल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद ।

More judgments on Section 271C

All 782 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →