BEHEST DREAMTRADE (P) LTD,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 509/KOL/2020Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 November 2021AY 2014-152 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remanded the matter back for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to produce relevant evidence and represent their case on merits before the CIT(A).

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) resulted in an ex parte order because the assessee was unable to appear for hearings due to reasons beyond their control. The assessee argued that their absence was neither deliberate nor intentional.

What were the issues?

Whether the principle of natural justice was violated by the ex parte order passed by the CIT(A) due to the assessee's unavoidable absence.

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, “A”

Before: Shri P. M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Partha Sarathi Choudhury

order : November 15, 2021 ORDER Shri Partha Sarathi Choudhury, Judicial Member: This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of Ld. CIT(A)-10, Kolkata u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 27.09.2019 for the assessment year 2014-15 as per the grounds of appeal

on record.

1.

2. At the very outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that in this case there is an ex parte order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) that in spite of several opportunities given to the assessee for hearing, the assessee was unable to appear before the First Appellate Authority for reasons beyond his control and that such absence was neither deliberate nor intentional on the part of the assessee. The Ld. Counsel further prayed that one more opportunity may be provided so that they can represent their case on merits before the Ld. CIT(A). It is the ground taken by the assessee that the rights and liability of the parties herein are yet to be determined. In such a scenario, the principle of natural justice would be well-served if the matter is remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. DR raised no serious objection in this regard.

Assessment Year: 2014-15 Behest Dreamtrade (P) Ltd 3. Having heard the rival contentions, we are of the considered opinion that the matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication as per law while complying with the principle of natural justice and we at the same time direct the assessee to produce relevant evidences/documents before the Ld. CIT(A) and represent their case on merits before him at the given date for hearing. In view thereof, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter back to the file accordingly.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 15.11.2021.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →