SANJAY BABASAHEB PATIL,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (CENTRAL), CIRCLE, KOLHAPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1577/PUN/2018Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 May 2022AY 2008-093 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 noted that the CIT(A) order was ex-parte and the assessee's rights were not adjudicated. Therefore, the tribunal set aside the CIT(A) order and restored the matter to the CIT(A)'s file for adjudication after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 190 days, which was condoned by the tribunal. The assessee's primary contention was that the CIT(A) order was ex-parte and sought a final opportunity to present their case.

What were the issues?

Whether an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) without proper adjudication should be set aside to provide the assessee an opportunity to be heard on merits.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Kulkarni
For Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani

आदेश / ORDER

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM :

1.

This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 27-12-2017 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Pune [‘CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2008-09.

2.

We note that this appeal was filed with a delay of 190 days. After hearing both the parties, we find that the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide which really prevented the assessee to file the present appeal in time. Therefore, the delay of 190 days are condoned.

3.

At the outset, the ld. AR submitted that the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) is an ex-parte order. The ld. CIT(A) went on to pass an order based on the material available on record namely, statement of facts and grounds of appeal as per Form-35 while filing the appeal before the First Appellate Authority. The ld. AR prayed that one final opportunity may be provided to the assessee so that the matter may be discussed and represented on merits before the ld. CIT(A) and therefore, it should be restored to the file of ld. CIT(A).

4. On the other hand, the ld. DR submitted that once the appeal is decided as per materials available on record, there was no need for the assessee to again go back to the ld. CIT(A).

5.

Heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We note that it is an ex-parte order where rights and liabilities of the assessee were not adjudicated upon. Since there was no appearance on record by the assessee and order of ld. CIT(A) was based only on materials available on records i.e. statement of facts, grounds of appeal filed by the assessee and the assessment order, the assessee should be given one final opportunity to defend his case through proper documentary evidences. In the interest of justice, we therefore, set aside the order of ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to his file for adjudication after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and at the same time, the assessee is directed to present himself before the ld. CIT(A) immediately on receipt of this order to represent his case on merits. Any service of notice is dispensable.

6.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 23rd May, 2022.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →