What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without giving a proper opportunity to be heard and without deciding the appeal on merits. Therefore, the order was set aside to provide a fresh opportunity.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed for non-prosecution. The CIT(A) noted that notices were issued but no submissions were filed, and no one appeared for the hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without providing a sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

M/S.Satgain Vinimay Private… vs DCIT | ITAT Lucknow 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI A.D JAIN & SHRI T.S. KAPOOR

For Appellant: Shri B.P. Yadav, Cost Acct

For Respondent: Shri C.K. Singh, DR

Hearing: 30/04/2019Pronounced: 03/05/2019

PER: T.S. KAPOOR, A.M.:

This is assessee’s appeal for the Assessment Year 2014-15, taking the following grounds:- “The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I Kanpur erred on facts and in Law in disposing off the appeal of the appellant by passing on ex-parte order without appreciating the facts that appellant was very much attending the hearing before the Ld. CIT- I, Kanpur. - 1. On the facts stated in the statement of facts the Ld. CIT(A) was not at all justified in disposing of the appeal of the appellant ex-parte, merits of the case of the appellant has not been considered. 2. On the facts stated in the statement of facts, the Ld. CIT(A) was not at all justified in confirming the addition of

2 ITA No. 160/Lkw/2018

Rs.4,86,290/- by passing an ex-parte order and hence addition of rs.4,86,290/- may kindly be deleted. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and in Law in not providing the appellant reasonable and sufficient opportunity to have its say and to make compliances of the reasons being relied upon by him in making addition in the hands of the appellant 4. That any other relief or reliefs as your honour may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, be granted. Your humble appellant craves leaves to amend, alter or otherwise modify the grounds appearing herein before with the kind permission of the Hon'ble Bench.”

By virtue of the impugned order, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal for non prosecution, observing that notices dated 19.09.2017, 07.11.2017 and 04.12.2017 for compliance on 25.09.2017, 22.11.2017 and 14.12.2017 were issued to assessee at the address submitted by the assessee in its memo of appeal; that however, no written submission or paper book had been filed in support of any of the grounds of appeal taken.

We have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. We noted that the ld. CIT(A) has passed the ex-parte order as according to him, nobody has appeared on the date when the appeal was fixed for hearing before him. The order of the CIT(A) talks of the notice/s having been ‘issued’ or ‘sent’ to the assessee and mentions nothing with regard to service thereof on the assessee. We also noticed from the order of the CIT(A) that he has summarily decided the appeal of the assessee without giving any cogent reason and his order is non speaking order. Under these circumstances, we feel that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee as ld. CIT(A) has not decided the appeal on merits. The provision of section 250 which deals with the procedure in appeal before the ld. CIT(A), allows a right to an assessee to

3 ITA No. 160/Lkw/2018

be heard at the time of hearing of appeal. Even the natural justice demands that no appeal should be disposed of without being heard the party or without giving him the proper and sufficient opportunity. We, therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play to both the parties, set aside the order of CIT(A) and restore the appeal to the file of the CIT(A) with the direction that the CIT(A) shall refix the said appeal and decide the appeal afresh after giving proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to be present on the date of hearing fixed by ld. CIT(A) and not to seek undue adjournment and co- operate with ld. CIT(A) in disposing of the appeal.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 03/05/2019. Sd/- Sd/- (A.D. Jain) (T.S. Kapoor) Vice President Accountant Member

Aks – Dtd. 03/05/2019 Copy of order forwarded to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) Commissioner (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order Assistant Registrar

M/S.SATGAIN VINIMAY PRIVATE LIMITED,KANPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, KANPUR

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