What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the matter back to the file of the CIT(A). The CIT(A) was directed to decide the appeal afresh after providing an adequate and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex parte. The assessee contended that they were not provided with an adequate opportunity of being heard.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in deciding the appeal ex parte without providing an adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Shri Anil Kumar, Delhi vs ITO | ITAT Jaipur 2017

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR

Before: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM & SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 677/JP/2017

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@

Hearing: 04/10/2017Pronounced: 09/10/2017

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh Hkkxpan] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh dqy Hkkjr] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM & SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 677/JP/2017 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2013-14 cuke Anil Kumar, I.T.O., 3rd Vs. 1168/308, Floor, Kuncha Ward 2(1), Mahajani, Chandani Chowk, Alwar. Delhi-110006 PAN No.: AHLPK 9851 H vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri P.C. Parwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri R.A. Verma (Addl.CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 04/10/2017 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 09/10/2017 vkns'k@ ORDER

PER: BHAGCHAND, A.M.

This is the appeal filed by the assessee emanates from the order of

the ld. CIT(A), Alwar dated 31/07/2017 for the A.Y. 2013-14, wherein the

assessee has taken following grounds of appeal:-

“(i) The ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in deciding the appeal ex- parte without providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. (ii) The ld. CIT(A) has erred on fact and in law in not deciding the various grounds of appeal raised before him on merit.”

2 ITA 677/JP/2017 Anil Kumar Vs ITO

The ld. CIT(A) has decided the appeal of the assessee ex parte.

While pleading on behalf of the assessee, the ld AR has submitted that

since the assessee was not provided adequate opportunity of being heard,

therefore, the issue raised in the appeal may be restored back to the file of

the Assessing Officer or to the ld. CIT(A).

We have heard both the sides on this issue. After hearing, we are of

the view that in the interest of justice and equity, this matter is restored

back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh after providing

adequate and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

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

purposes only.

Order pronounced in the open court on 09/10/2017. Sd/- Sd/- ¼dqy Hkkjr½ ¼Hkkxpan½ (Kul Bharat) (BHAGCHAND) U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 09th October, 2017

*Ranjan आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Shri Anil Kumar, Delhi. 1. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The I.T.O., Ward 2(1), Alwar. 2. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 3. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A) 4. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 5.

3 ITA 677/JP/2017 Anil Kumar Vs ITO xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 677/JP/2017) 6.

vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत

SHRI ANIL KUMAR,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2-1, JAIPUR

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments