M/S. MANGAL TIRTH ESTATE LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE - 4(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3347/CHNY/2019Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 December 2021AY 2015-162 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, citing the principle of natural justice. The assessee was directed to substantiate their stand.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-attendance. The assessee failed to attend appellate proceedings despite multiple opportunities.

What were the issues?

Whether an ex-parte order of dismissal for non-prosecution should be set aside to provide an opportunity for a fresh adjudication on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

For Appellant: Shri M. Viswanathan (CA) – Ld. AR, Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
For Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR

आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member)

1.

Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, Chennai [CIT(A)] dated 27-09-2019 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s.143(3) of the Act on 26-12-2017. Upon perusal of impugned order, it could be seen that the order is an ex-parte order since assessee failed to attend appellate 2 - proceedings despite being provided with various opportunities of hearing as noted by Ld. CIT(A) in para-2 of impugned order. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

2.

The Ld. AR pleaded for restoration of appeal back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) by submitting that assessee undertake to appeal before lower authorities. The Ld. DR submitted that assessee’s own negligence resulted into dismissal of the appeal.

3.

Though we concur that the assessee has remained negligent in attending appellate proceedings, however, keeping in view the principle of natural justice, we deem it fit to provide another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Accordingly, the appeal stand restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication by way of speaking order with a direction to the assessee to substantiate his stand.

4.

The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 21st December, 2021.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →