SMT. MANOHARAN MYTHILI,TRICHY vs. ITO, WARD - 1 (2), TRICHY

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2323/CHNY/2019Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 October 2020AY 2016-173 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that in the interest of justice and natural justice, the assessee should be given another opportunity to present their case. The CIT(A)'s order was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) resulted in an ex-parte order because the assessee could not appear due to circumstances beyond their control. The CIT(A) did not adjudicate the issue on merits.

What were the issues?

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

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO & SHRI S. JAYARAMAN

Hearing: 13.10.2020Pronounced: 13.10.2020

आदेश / O R D E R

PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

The appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Trichy in dated 03.07.2019 relevant to the assessment year 2016-2017.

2 -: 2. Mr. N. Arjunraj, Chartered Accountant for Mr. Sridhar, Advocate represented on behalf of the Assessee and Ms. Anita, JCIT represented on behalf of the Revenue.

3.

When this appeal was taken up for hearing, the learned Counsel for the Assessee had submitted that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Trichy passed an ex-parte order and submitted that the assessee could not appear before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals),1, Trichy as circumstances were beyond his control. He prayed that one more opportunity be given to the assessee to substantiate his case before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Trichy.

4.

On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative has strongly objected for remitting the matter back to the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Trichy.

5.

We have heard both the sides and perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below.

6.

We find that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Trichy had passed an ex-parte order vide order dated 03.07.2019. Moreover, on perusal of the appellate order, we find that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Trichy has not adjudicated the issue in appeal on merits. Thus, we are of the view that in the interest of justice and by following the principles of natural justice, one more

3 -: opportunity should be given to the Assessee. In view of the above, we set aside the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Trichy and remit the matter back to the file of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Trichy to pass a fresh order in accordance with law. We further observe that the learned Counsel for the assessee is directed to appear before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Trichy when the date is given for hearing without fail. In view of the above, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

7.

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in I.T.A.No.2323/Chny/2019 is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 13th October, 2020 in Chennai.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →