VIRJI VELJI PATEL,MUMBAI vs. ITO 17 (3)(5), MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without giving proper opportunity of hearing. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the order and remanded the appeal back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte. The assessee contended that notices of hearing were not served on any of the three addresses provided, and their submissions to the AO were not properly considered.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without providing the assessee with a proper opportunity of hearing.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC ‘ BENCH
आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M):
This appeal in A.Y.2013-14 arises out of the order by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-28, Mumbai in appeal No.CIT(A)-28/IT-351/ITO-17(3)(5)/2016-17 dated 08/08/2018 (ld. CIT(A) in short) against the order of assessment passed u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act) dated 31/03/2016 by the ld. Income Tax Officer 17(3)(5), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO).
Though the assessee has raised several grounds of appeal, we find that the preliminary grounds raised by the assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) has passed an exparte order without giving proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee as notice of hearing was not served on the assessee by the ld. CIT(A).
We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. The ld. AR before us stated that assessee has mentioned three addresses in the form No.35 being the statutory form prescribed for filing appeal before the ld. CIT(A), and that the notice of hearing was not served on any of these addresses. All the details that were furnished by the assessee before the ld. AO were not properly considered by the ld. AO and hence, it was pleaded on behalf of the assessee that one more opportunity be given to the assessee for fair representation before the ld. CIT(A). The DR fairly agreed to the said proposition. Accordingly, we deem it fit and appropriate to set aside the entire appeal to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication in accordance with law. Needless to mention that assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to co-operate with the ld. CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the appeal and not to take any adjournment except due to exceptional or unavoidable circumstances. Accordingly the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 26/ 11/2021 by way of proper mentioning in the notice board.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026