Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed an ex-parte dismissal by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for Assessment Year 2017-18. The assessee's counsel sought an adjournment due to a medical appointment, which was denied, and claimed the assessee was unaware of the hearing date before the ld. CIT(Appeals).
Held
The Tribunal, considering the principle of natural justice, remitted the matter back to the ld. CIT(Appeals) for fresh adjudication on merits, setting aside the earlier ex-parte dismissal. It also cautioned the assessee to promptly cooperate with future proceedings.
Key Issues
Whether the ld. CIT(Appeals) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte, and if the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-(KZ)
Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Gour Ghosh,……………………..………...………Appellant Raychak, Debipur, Udaynarayanpur, Howrah-711412, West Bengal [PAN:ADRPG6903A] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………….…….Respondent Ward-52(1), Kolkata, Central Revenue Building, 169, A.J.C. Bose Road, Entally, Kolkata-700014 Appearances by: Shri Sunil Surana, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Susanta Saha, Addl. CIT, Sr. D.R., appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: June 25, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order: June 26, 2025 O R D E R
The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 11th September 2023 passed for Assessment Year 2017-18.
(A.Y. 2017-2018) Gour Ghosh 2. At the time of hearing, ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed for adjournment on the ground that he has appointment with Cardiac Surgeon Mr. Anjan Seotia. The contention of the ld. Counsel for the assessee is rejected. The ld. Counsel argued that the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte without going into the merit of the case. He further submitted that the assessee was not aware of the date of hearing before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Therefore, the assessee was not in a position to appear before the ld. CIT(Appeals).
On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative submitted that sufficient opportunity was being provided to the assessee but the assessee failed to appear before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Therefore, the ld. CIT(Appeals) has no other option except dismissing the appeal and he pleaded to uphold the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals).
I have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. By considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in order to ensure the principle of natural justice, I am of the view that it is a fit case to provide one more opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, I remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to dispose of the appeal without any inference on the observations of earlier order passed by him. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) failing which the Ld. CIT(Appeals) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits (A.Y. 2017-2018) Gour Ghosh of the case, based on the materials available on the record. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee in the appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 26/06/2025.