WAVELENGTH COMMUNICATION,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR. 54, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 397/KOL/2021Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 June 2022AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s ex-parte dismissal violated principles of natural justice. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits after providing a hearing opportunity.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte without considering the grounds of appeal. The CIT(A) passed a cryptic, two-line order after the assessee requested an adjournment.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without considering the assessee's grounds and adjournment request, thereby violating natural justice.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH: KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar]

Hearing: 23.05.2022Pronounced: 27.06.2022

ORDER

Per Shri Rajesh Kumar, AM:

1.

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-16, Kolkata [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] dated 16.03.2020 for the assessment year 2013-14.

2.

Though the Registry has pointed out that the appeal is barred by limitation, however, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Miscellaneous Application No. 665 of 2021 in SMW(C ) No. 3 of 2020, the period of COVID-19 pandemic is to be excluded for the purpose of counting the limitation period. In view of this, the appeal is treated as filed within the limitation period.

3.

At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted before the bench that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the appellate order ex-parte dismissing the appeal of the assessee without disposing off the various grounds as raised by the assessee as the appellate order is very cryptic and passed in a summary manner. The Ld. Counsel submitted that the assessee had moved an application seeking adjournment of hearing on the date fixed for hearing however the Ld. CIT(A) proceeded to dispose off the appeal without considering the request of the assessee for granting adjournment by passing two line order and thus the appeal of the assessee was dismissed. The Ld.

Wavelength Communication Counsel therefore prayed before the bench that the assessee may kindly be given one more opportunity to present its case before the Ld. CIT(A) by restoring the issue back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) so that ends of interest of justice are well served. The Ld. D.R on the other hand left the issue to the wisdom of the bench.

4.

Having heard both the parties and perusing the material on record including the appellate order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), we note that the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed in liminie without discussing the merits by giving two line conclusion which is apparently against the principle of natural justice and fair play. In our opinion, the ends of justice could be met if assessee get one more opportunity to present its case before the Ld. CIT(A) and therefore we are inclined to restore the appeal back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with the direction to decide the same on merit after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee within a period of six months from the date of this order.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 27th June, 2022

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →