What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without affording a proper opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, the assessee should be given another chance to present their case.

The assessee's appeal was heard by the CIT(A) on a date prior to the issued notice. The CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without giving the assessee a proper opportunity to present their case.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without providing a proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Vadlamani Annayya Sastry… vs ITO | ITAT Visakhapatnam 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM

For Appellant: Shri I. Kama Sastry– FCA

Hearing: 29/11/2018

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 444/VIZ/2018 (Asst. Year : 2007-08) Vadlamani Annayya Sastry, vs. ITO, Ward-4(2), D.No. 37-11-38/5, Visakhapatnam. P.R. Gardens, Visakhapatnam. PAN No. ACDPV 6158 P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri I. Kama Sastry– FCA. Department By : Mrs. Suman Malik – Sr.DR Date of hearing : 29/11/2018. Date of pronouncement : 07/12/2018. O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Hyderabad, dated 28/06/2013 for the Assessment Year 2007-08. 2. When this appeal is taken up for hearing, ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee has submitted that ld. CIT(A) issued a notice for hearing of the appeal on 17/07/2018, and is preponed to 04/07/2018, however, order is passed on 28/06/2018. He submitted that assessee may be given opportunity to substantiate his case before the ld. CIT(A). We also heard ld. Departmental Representative in this regard.

2 ITA No.444 /VIZ/2018 (Vadlamani Annayya Sastry)

We find that ld. CIT(A) passed exparte order without giving proper opportunity to substantiate his case much prior to the date of notice. In our opinion, the assessee should be given one more opportunity to substantiate his case before the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to him to adjudicate the issues and pass necessary orders in accordance with law after affordable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 4. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order Pronounced in open Court on this 07th day of Dec., 2018.

Sd/- sd/- (D.S. SUNDER SINGH) (V. DURGA RAO) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated : 07th December, 2018. vr/- Copy to: 1. The Assessee – Vadlamani Annaayya Sastry, D.No. 37-11-38/5, P.R. Gardens, Visakhapatnam. 2. The Revenue – ITO, Ward-4(2), Visakhapatnam. 3. The Pr.CIT-2, Visakhapatnam. 4. The CIT(A)-9, Hyderabad. 5. The D.R., Visakhapatnam. 6. Guard file. By order

(VUKKEM RAMBABU) Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Visakhapatnam.

VADLAMANI ANNAYYA SASTRY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2), VISAKHAPATNAM

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments