Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(Appeals) was dismissed ex-parte, with the assessee contending they were unaware of the hearing date. The Departmental Representative argued that sufficient opportunities were provided to the assessee, who failed to submit their case.
Held
The Tribunal, in adherence to the principle of natural justice, remitted the matter back to the CIT(Appeals). The CIT(Appeals) was directed to provide the assessee with another opportunity to dispose of the appeal on merits, with a caution to the assessee to cooperate with the proceedings.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(Appeals) was justified in dismissing the assessee's appeal ex-parte when the assessee claimed not to be aware of the hearing date.
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 Pabitra Mondal,……..…………………...………Appellant Vivekananda Pally, Bankura-722101, West Bengal [PAN:CAMPM8321C] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………….…..Respondent Ward-3(1), Bankura, Income Tax Building, Kenduadihi, Bankura-722102, West Bengal Appearances by: Shri Manoj Kataruka, A.R., 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. Addl./Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Mumbai dated 3rd January, 2025 passed for Assessment Year 2017-18.
The contention of the ld. Counsel for the assessee is that the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte (A.Y. 2017-2018) Pabitra Mondal 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 furnish its submission in support of the grounds raised in this appeal during the assessment proceedings and also to provide submission before the ld. CIT(Appeals) to represent its case. 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 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.