DISTRICT WATER CONSERVATION OFFICER, SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT (FORMERLY KNOWN AS " MINOR IRRIGATION LOCAL SECTOR DIVISION),LATUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TDS-RANGE, NASHIK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 16/PUN/2019Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 November 2022AY 2012-134 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT set aside the CIT(Appeals)'s ex-parte order and remanded the matter back. The assessee is granted one final opportunity to present their case on merits before the CIT(Appeals).

What were the facts?

The assessee, District Water Conservation Officer, failed to appear before the CIT(Appeals) despite multiple opportunities. The CIT(Appeals) passed an ex-parte order based on available documents.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Appeals) order passed ex-parte without proper adjudication on merits is sustainable. Whether principles of natural justice require a final opportunity for the assessee to present their case.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY

For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

ORDER

PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER

1.

This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Aurangabad dated 06-03-2018 for A.Y. 2012-13 as per the grounds of appeal on record.

2.

Despite service of notice, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor is any application for adjournment filed by the assessee.

3.

We have heard Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. We find that the Ld.CIT(Appeals) has passed an ex-parte order and the rights and liabilities of the parties herein were not adjudicated on merits. That on perusal of Para 2 of the CIT(Appeals)’s order, it is apparent that several opportunities were provided to the assessee asking him to attend the hearing. However, the assessee had remained absent.

District Water Conservation Officer A.Y. 2012-13

4.

That further it is evident from Para 3 of his order the Ld. CIT(Appeals) decided the appeal on the basis of documents available on record. The process of judicial adjudication requires Sub-ordinate Appellate Authority to adjudicate the case on merits and come out with a speaking order. In the present case, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) was unable to do so because of the evasive nature of the assessee. However, keeping in mind the principles of natural justice and the very fact, the Income Tax Act is welfare legislation; we are of the considered view that one final opportunity should be given to the assessee to present his case on merits. Therefore, the assessee is directed to present himself or through his authorised representative before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) immediately on receipt of this order along with relevant/ necessary documents to present his case on merits before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) and he shall adjudicate the same by passing a speaking order while complying with the principles of natural justice. In view of the aforesaid directions, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) and remit the matter back to his file. Any issuance of notice is dispensed with.

5.

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

Order pronounced in the open Court on this 22nd day of November, 2022

Sd/- sd/- (INTURI RAM RAO) (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune; Dated, the 22nd November 2022 Ankam

District Water Conservation Officer A.Y. 2012-13

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →