M/S. ANALYSIS MOTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,HALDWANI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, RANGE-1, BAREILLY
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee was not given a proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard by the CIT(A). Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside to provide a fresh opportunity.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte as no one appeared on behalf of the assessee. The CIT(A) had issued notices, but the assessee neither appeared nor filed written submissions.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without providing a proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH ‘A’, LUCKNOW
Before: SHRI A. D. JAIN & SHRI T. S. KAPOOR
PER T. S. KAPOOR, A.M.
This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of learned CIT(A), Bareilly dated 30/06/2016 pertaining to assessment year 2012-13.
We have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. We noted that learned CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order as according to him, nobody has appeared on the dates when the appeal was fixed for hearing before him. From the order of CIT(A), it is apparent that the CIT(A) had issued various notices to the assessee however, neither anybody appeared nor filed written submissions and ultimately the CIT(A) passed the ex-parte order. However, we feel that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee as learned CIT(A) has not decided the
I.T.A. No.203/Lkw/2018 Assessment Year:2012-13 2
appeal on merits. The provision of section 250 which deals with the procedure in appeal before the 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 are of the view from the facts of the case that the assessee has not been given proper and sufficient opportunity before disposing of the appeal by the CIT(A). 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 learned CIT(A) and not seek undue adjournment and co- operate with learned CIT(A) in disposing of the appeal.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
(Order pronounced in the open court on 18/01/2019)
Sd/. Sd/. ( A. D. JAIN ) ( T. S. KAPOOR ) Vice President Accountant Member
Dated:18/01/2019 *Singh
Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., Lucknow
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026
- Ayush Sureshchandra Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026