RAVI KIRAN MOTHUKURU,HANAMAKONDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, WARANGAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1762/HYD/2017Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 July 2018AY 2007-082 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order. Considering the assessee's submission to cooperate, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order for AY 2007-08. The assessee argued that they were not given an adequate opportunity to be heard.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in deciding the appeal ex-parte without providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 54F

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH & SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD

For Appellant: Shri T. Chaitanya Kumar, Shri J. Pavitram Kumar
Hearing: 18.07.2018Pronounced: 20.07.2018

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “B”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI B. RAMAKOTAIAH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 1762/Hyd/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Ravi Kiran Mothukuru, vs. ITO, Hanamkonda. Ward – 2 Warangal. PAN – AJDPM7073K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri T. Chaitanya Kumar Shri J. Pavitram Kumar Revenue by : Date of hearing 18.07.2018 Date of pronouncement 20.07.2018

O R D E R PER CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JM:

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A)-10, Hyderabad dated 29.06.2017 for the A.Y 2007- 08. The assessee challenged the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in deciding the appeal ex-parte, apart from raising several grounds on the disallowance made u/s 54F of the Act.

2.

Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the CIT(A) passed ex-parte order without giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, therefore, the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

3.

On the other hand, Ld. DR has no serious objection in restoring the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A).

4.

On hearing both the parties, and perusing the orders of the Ld. CIT(A), we find that the case was posted for hearing on various dates mentioned in the Ld. CIT(A) order and the

2 ITA No. 1762/Hyd/2017 Ravo Kiran Mothukuru, Hanmakonda. assessee responded to three notices out of five and on two occasions there was no representation from assessee. It is submitted that due to personal reasons assessee could not respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(A). Before us Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee will cooperate with the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to substantiate his claim. Considering the submissions of the assessee, we feel it appropriate to restore this appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Thus, we restore the matter to Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo consideration. Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Pronounced in the open Court on 20th July, 2018.

Sd/- Sd/- (B. RAMAKOTAIAH) (CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Hyderabad, Dated: 20th July, 2018 KRK Copy to:- 1) Shri M. Ravi Kiran C/o T. Chaitanya Kumar, Advocate, Flat No.102, Gowri APTS, Urduhall Lane, Hyderabad-29. 2) ITO, Ward-2, Warangal. 3) CIT(A)-10, Hyderabad. 4) Pr. CIT-III, Hyderabad. 5) The Departmental Representative, I.T.A.T., Hyderabad. 6) Guard File

More judgments on Section 54F

All 2,628 judgments and leading authorities on Section 54F →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →