MR. SYED JAFFER,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 1(2)(2), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2234/BANG/2019Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 November 2020AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remanded the matter back for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) was directed to issue notice to the assessee at the correct address and provide an opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to appear before the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A). The ITAT noted a discrepancy in the assessee's address provided to the AO and the CIT(A), which might have led to non-service of notices. The assessee also did not appear before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly ensured service of notice to the assessee and provided adequate opportunity of being heard before passing the order.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI & SMT. BEENA PILLAI

For Respondent: Smt. R Premi, JCIT (DR)

ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER

Present appeal has been filed by assessee against order dated 30/07/2019 passed by Ld.CIT(A)-1, Bangalore for assessment year 2013-14.

2.

Before us, none appeared on behalf of assessee, nor has filed any application seeking adjournment.

3.

On perusal of records placed before us, we note that, assessee failed to appear before Ld.AO during assessment proceedings, as well as before Ld.CIT(A). However, it is noted that, appeal was filed in time before Ld.CIT(A). We note that assessee filed appeal before this Tribunal against order passed by Ld.CIT(A) in time. Ld.CIT(A) issued several notices to assessee which was not attended. 4. We note that, Ld.CIT(A) in impugned order has recorded registered address of assessee to be: 1432, HM NGEF layout, Kasturi Nagar, Bangalore room, 5600043. 5. But in Form 35, assessee mentioned the address to be: Flat No.143, 2HM, East of NGEF, Kasturi Nagar, Bangalore, 560043. 6. Due to difference in the manner in which the address was mentioned, the notice may not have been served at the right address. We therefore are of the view that issues on merits must be re visited by Ld.CIT(A). Ld.CIT(A) is directed to issue notice of hearing at the address mentioned in Form 35. He shall call for all details/evidences in respect of unsecured loans and carry out verification in accordance with law. Assessee is directed to attend the notice of hearing issued by Ld.CIT(A) either himself or through an authorized representative. Assessee is directed to provide all relevant details in respect of addition under challenge.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →