TWENTY FIRST CENTURY MANAGEMENT SERVICES LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 3(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1247/CHNY/2019Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 December 2020AY 2010-113 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 provide a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte. The assessee argued that they were not given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The ITAT noted that the CIT(A)'s order was non-speaking.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

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, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGHAND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA

Hearing: 28.12.2020Pronounced: 28.12.2020

आदेश /O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP: This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Chennai, in dated 15.02.2019. The Assessment was framed by ACIT, Corporate Circle-3(1), Chennai U/s 143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2010-11 vide order dated 29.03.2016.

2.

At the outset, it is noticed that none is present from assessee’s side. By going through the order of CIT(A), it is further noticed that the order of CIT(A) is ex-parte and the grounds raised

by the assessee i.e., ground No.2 reads as under:-

1.

2. The learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) grossly erred in dismissing the appeal, without affording reasonable opportunity.”

We noted that on various dates notices were issued to the assessee but none appeared and no details were filed. But it is also noticed that the order of CIT(A) is a non-speaking order because entire facts are not discussed, whereas the AO has discussed the facts in detail as is evident from the assessment order. Even now before us none is present but it will not serve any purpose if we keep this appeal pending before the Tribunal because the CIT(A)’s order is a non-speaking order and the appeal has to be remanded back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. When a query was put to ld. senior Department Representative, he fairly agreed that reasonable opportunity of being heard should be provided to the assessee and matter be adjudicated by passing a speaking order.

3.

After hearing ld. senior DR and going through the factum of the case, we are of the view that the order of CIT(A) is to be set aside and hence we set aside the order of CIT(A) and remand the matter back to his file for providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Needless to say that the assessee should also behave as a responsible citizen and co-operate with the CIT(A) in adjudication of the appellate proceedings as soon as possible. In view of the above, we restore back the appeal to the file of the CIT(A).

4.

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

Order pronounced in the court on 28th December, 2020 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →