M/S. NITYAM SINGH GAUTAM TRUST,BHILWARA vs. ITO, WARD-4, BHILWARA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The ITAT found that the CIT(A) did not provide a proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside, and the matter was restored for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee appealed to the CIT(A) against an order. The CIT(A) decided the appeal ex-parte, noting written submissions were filed but without fixing a hearing date. The assessee then appealed to the ITAT.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) properly afforded an opportunity of hearing to the assessee before deciding the appeal ex-parte.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR
Before: SHRI N.K.SAINI & SHRI N.K. CHOUDHRY
PER N.K.CHOUDHRY
The instant appeal has been preferred by the Assessee/Appellant against the order dated 25.04.2018 impugned herein passed by the Ld. CIT(A), Ajmer u/s 250(6) of the I.T. Act (hereinafter called as the 'Act') whereby the Ld. CIT(A) affirmed the rectification application filed u/s 154 by the assessee. 2. At the outset, it is obseved that the Ld. CIT(A) has decided the appeal as an ex-parte and in Para No.2 of its order observed as under: "During the course of appellate proceedings, the appellant has filed written submissions in 'dak'. After going through the written submissions filed during the course of appellate proceedings and the order of the AO, the appeal is decided as under."
2 ITA No.347/Jodh/2018 M/s Nityam Singh Gautam Trust vs. ITO
In the order, though it is observed by the Ld. CIT(A) that during the course of appellate proceedings, the appellant has filed the written submission in 'dak', however from the order it does not reflect that the Ld. CIT(A) has ever fixed the appeal for any date before passing the order therefore to meet the ends of justice, we are inclined to set aside the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and restoring the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to decide afresh while affording reasonable and proper opportunities of being heard to the assessee. It is also ordered that the assessee shall co-operate with the appellant proceedings and shall appear as and when required by the Ld. CIT(A) and in case of failure on its part the Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to draw the adverse inference against the assessee.
In the result, the appeal of the Assessee stands allowed for
statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 30.04.2019.
Sd/- Sd/- (N.K.SAINI) (N.K.CHOUDHRY) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 30/04/2019 PK/PS Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT
ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
More judgments on Section 154
- Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs Rakesh Kumar Malani, JaipurITA 1425/JPR/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2025-26
- Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs Anita Sharma, JaipurITA 1344/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Ramtirath Bawa, Nagpur vs ITO Ward3(4), NagpurITA 327/NAG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Mohinder Singh, Nagpur vs ITO Ward 3(4), NagpurITA 322/NAG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Ramakrishna Reddy Makireddy, Hyderabad vs ACIT, Circle-5(1), HyderabadITA 70/HYD/2026[2007-08]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2007-08
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Gagan Bihari Rout@Gagan Rout vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026