M/S VIGILANCE SECURITY AND ALLIED SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-12(2), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2434/BANG/2018Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 March 2020AY 2007-083 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's submission regarding the violation of natural justice. The order of the CIT(Appeals) was set aside due to the lack of proper opportunity for the assessee to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(Appeals) was dismissed ex parte. The assessee contended that proper notice was not served, leading to their non-appearance and a violation of natural justice principles.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Appeals) order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice due to improper service of notice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ia)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA

For Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Hearing: 02.03.2020Pronounced: 05.03.2020

Per Pradip Kumar Kedia, Accountant Member

1.

The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the assessee against the order of CIT(Appeals), Mysore dated 29,12,2017 arising from assessment order passed by Assessing Officer (AO) u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act] dated 29.10.2009 relating to assessment year 2007-08.

2.

The assessee in the captioned appeal has raised several grounds assailing the order of CIT(Appeals) for dismissal of the appeal of assessee ex parte. Thus, one of the substantive grounds raised by assessee seeks to impugne the order of CIT(Appeals) towards alleged violation of principles of natural justice.

3.

When the matter was called for hearing, none appeared for the assessee. Accordingly, the matter is proceeded ex parte.

4.

It is noticed that the assessee duly attended before the AO. Certain disallowances were made amounting to Rs.6,69,733 by invoking section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [the Act]. The disallowance were challenged before the CIT(Appeals). However, the CIT(Appeals) has passed the order ex parte.

5.

Before the Tribunal, the assessee inter alia mentioned by way of its submissions that the registered office of the assessee has not changed and therefore the observations of the CIT(Appeals) that the notices have remained unserved on the ground that addressee has left is incorrect. The assessee has been prevented by sufficient cause for non-appearance before the CIT(Appeals) in the absence of proper service of notice.

6.

We find merit in the assertions made on behalf of assessee as in the grounds of appeal. The violation of principles of natural justice is evident in the present case which has remained unrebutted from the revenue. The adjudication of issues by the CIT(Appeals) in limine thus cannot be countenanced. We, thus, set aside the order of CIT(Appeals) and remand all the issues placed before the Tribunal for de novo consideration of the CIT(Appeals) after granting proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It shall be open to the assessee to adduce all evidences before the CIT(Appeals) in accordance with law as may be necessary and expedient to support its case.

7.

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

Pronounced in the open court on this 5th day of March, 2020.

More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)

All 7,300 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(ia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →