M/S CHIRAG HOTELS PVT. LTD,VIRAR vs. ITO 12(1)(4), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 999/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 September 2020AY 2010-113 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's claim of non-receipt of notices and violation of natural justice. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee did not receive notices for appellate proceedings before the CIT(A) at the address mentioned in Form No. 35. Consequently, the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order confirming the assessment. The assessee appealed this order, claiming a violation of natural justice.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without proper service of notice to the assessee, thereby violating the principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi– Ld. AR
For Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh -Ld. Sr. DR

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

1.

Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year [in short referred to as ‘AY’] 2010-11 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-20, Mumbai, [in short referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], Appeal No. CIT-20/IT-10366/2017-18 dated 27/12/2018 on certain grounds of appeal. One of the grounds raised by the assessee is that Ld. CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order for assessee’s non-attendance M/s. Chirag Hotels Private Limited Assessment Year: 2010-11 whereas the assessee did not receive any notice of hearings at the address mentioned in Form No. 35.

2. Pressing the said ground, the Ld. Authorized Representative for Assessee (AR), Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi, submitted that three notices as enumerated in impugned order were never received by the assessee which is duly supported by the affidavit of the assessee’s managing director and therefore, the order was passed in violation of principle of natural justice. The affidavit has been placed on record. In the said background, Ld. AR pleaded for another opportunity of hearing and assured promptness during rehearing of the appeal. Per Contra, Ld. DR submitted that the assessee remained negligent in attending the appellate proceedings.

3. Fact on record would reveal that an assessment was framed against the assessee u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 29/12/2017 wherein the income of the assessee was determined at Rs.155.57 Lacs, being Short Term Capital Gain earned on certain immovable property. However, not satisfied with the assessment, the assessee preferred further appeal before Ld. CIT(A). As is evident from para-4 of the impugned order, the assessee failed to attend the appellate proceedings despite being provided with various opportunities of being heard. Consequently, the assessment was confirmed. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

4. Upon careful consideration of rival submissions, material on record and keeping in view the principles of natural justice, the bench deem it fit to afford another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Accordingly, the matter stands remitted back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for re-adjudication M/s. Chirag Hotels Private Limited Assessment Year: 2010-11 with a direction to the assessee to attend the appellate proceedings forthwith as assured by Ld. AR. Needless to add that failure on the part of the assessee would enable Ld. CIT(A) to re-adjudicate the appeal on the basis of material on record.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →