M/S. BEE KAY PRECISION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,KANPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-V, KANPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 337/LKW/2018Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow03 May 2019AY 2013-143 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without deciding the appeal on merits and without giving a proper opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed for non-prosecution. The CIT(A) observed that notices were sent to the assessee's email address, but no submissions were filed. The assessee contended that they were not provided a proper opportunity to be heard.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without providing a proper opportunity to the assessee to be heard. Whether the CIT(A)'s order was a non-speaking order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

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

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri C.K. Singh, DR
Hearing: 02/05/2019

PER: A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT:

This is assessee’s appeal for the Assessment Year 2013-14, taking the following grounds:-

“1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance on account of depreciation against property of Rs.4,08,067.00. 2. That the ld. CIT(A) has erred in not providing proper opportunity to the appellant.”

2.

By virtue of the impugned order, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal for non prosecution, observing that notices dated 14.12.2017 and 09.01.2018 for compliance on 07.12.2017 and 17.01.2018 were served on the e-mail address submitted by the assessee while e-filing

2 ITA No. 337/Lkw/2018

the appeal; that however, no written submission or paper book had been filed in support of any of the grounds of appeal taken.

3.

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 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

3 ITA No. 337/Lkw/2018

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.

4.

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/- (T.S. Kapoor) (A.D. Jain) Accountant Member Vice President 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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →