WELCOME DISTILLERIES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHHATTISGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1547/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 October 2025AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRIPRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)3 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 Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) found that the CIT(A)'s ex-parte orders, passed without considering the adjournment request, violated provisions of Section 250(6) of the Act. The ITAT, in the interest of justice and fairplay, restored the appeals to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on merits after providing the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals for multiple assessment years were dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) without a decision on merits, despite the assessee requesting an adjournment to furnish a reply. The assessee's counsel prayed for the appeals to be restored to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss appeals ex-parte without deciding the issues on merits and without considering the assessee's request for an adjournment, in violation of Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM & SHRIPRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Singh, AR
For Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR
Hearing: 18.09.2025Pronounced: 15.10.2025
2.

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted before the Bench that in all these three appeals the learned CIT (A) has passed ex-parte orders without deciding the issue on merits. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that on the date appointed by the learned CIT (A) for hearing, the assessee moved an adjournment application/request before the appellate authority to allow some time to furnish the reply, however, instead of granting the adjournment, the learned CIT (A) passed the appellate order dismissing the appeal

3.

The ld. DR on the other hand left the issue to the wisdom of the Bench.

4.

After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the materials available on record, we find that apparently these appeals were decided ex-parte by the learned CIT (A) by not considering the request for adjournment moved by the assessee resulting into passing an ex-parte order in limine without deciding the issues at merit which is in violation of Provisions of Section 250(6) of the Act. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fairplay, these appeals are restored to the file of the learned CIT (A) with a direction to decide the same on merit after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. All the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.

5.

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 15.10.2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →