What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT set aside the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) and remanded the case back for fresh adjudication. The assessee was to be given an adequate opportunity of being heard.

The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A) on the date of hearing, resulting in an ex-parte order. The assessee later convinced the ITAT that there was a sufficient cause for their absence.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without affording sufficient opportunity to the assessee, and if the assessee had a sufficient cause for non-appearance.

Ghanshyam Jindal, Jinnaram… vs ITO | ITAT Hyderabad 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “A” SMC BENCH: HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY

Hearing: 08.05.2018Pronounced: 08.05.2018

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A” SMC BENCH: HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA. No.1536/Hyd/2017 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Ghanshyam Jindal, vs. Income Tax Officer, S.Y.No. 296/7/9, Ward-1, IDA Bollaram, Jinnaram, Sangareddy. Medak District – 502325. PAN: AFVPJ 3720 JL (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee: Shri S. Rama Rao For Revenue : Shri B. Suresh Babu, DR Date of Hearing : 08.05.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 08.05.2018 ORDER PER J. SUDHAKARA REDDY, AM.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Hyderabad dated 29.06.2017 for the A.Y. 2012-2013 u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). 2. After hearing the rival contentions, I find that the First Appellate Authority has passed an ex-parte order as the assessee could not appear before him on the date of hearing. The assessee has convinced me that he was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing before the Ld. CIT(A) on the date of hearing. Hence, in the interest of justice, I set aside this appeal to the file of the First Appellate Authority for fresh adjudication in accordance with law, after giving the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. Hence, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced the in open Court on 08th May, 2018. Sd/- (J. SUDHAKARA REDDY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 08th May, 2018.

OKK, Sr.PS

Copy to

Ghanshyam Jindal, S.Y. No.296/7/9, IDA Bollaram, Jinnaram, Medak District. 2. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Sangareddy. 3. CIT (A)-5, Hyderabad. 4. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2, Hyderabad. 5. DR, ITAT, Hyderabad. 6. Guard File

GHANSHYAM JINDAL, JINNARAM MANDAL,MEDAK DIST vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SANGAREDDY

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments