SHRI POTLURI RAMESH,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(2)(1), BANGALORE
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that in the interest of natural justice, the assessee should be heard. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside and the issues were restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte as the notices sent by the CIT(A) allegedly did not reach the assessee. The assessee's representative argued that the matters should be heard afresh by the CIT(A).
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) order passed ex-parte without hearing the assessee is valid. The primary issue was the denial of an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE
Before: SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN & SHRI B.R. BASKARAN
PER B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 03-08-2018 passed by Ld CIT(A)-7, Bengaluru and it relates to the assessment year 2015-16.
We heard the parties and perused the record. We notice that the Ld CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order, without hearing the assessee. A perusal of the order passed by Ld CIT(A) shows that the Ld CIT(A) has sent notice of hearing twice. The Ld CIT(A) also noticed that the second notice has been delivered by the postal authorities.
Shri Potluri Ramesh, Bangalore Page 2 of 3 Since there was no response from the assessee, the Ld CIT(A) proceeded to dispose of the appeal, ex-parte.
The Ld A.R submitted that the notices sent by Ld CIT(A) did not reach the hands of the assessee. He submitted that there are multiple issues in this appeal and accordingly prayed that the matters may be sent to the file of the Ld CIT(A) for adjudicating them after hearing the assessee. The Ld D.R did not object to the same.
Having heard rival submissions, we are of the view that, in the interest of natural justice, all the issues should be restored to the file of Ld CIT(A) for adjudicating them afresh, since the assessee was not heard in the first round. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by Ld CIT(A) and restore all the issues to his file for adjudicating them afresh, after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to extend full co-operation to Ld CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the appeal.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 8th Sept, 2021.
Sd/- Sd/- (N.V. Vasudevan) (B.R. Baskaran) Vice President Accountant Member Bangalore, Dated 8th Sept, 2021. VG/SPS
Shri Potluri Ramesh, Bangalore
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Priya, Townhall Road, Cuttack vs. Superintendent Cuttack- I Range, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026