ALLWORTH DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-4(3), KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) and restored the matter for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) was directed to provide the assessee with a proper opportunity to present their case and then decide the matter.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) resulted in an ex-parte order due to the absence of the assessee's counsel. The assessee contended that this absence was not intentional and requested an opportunity to present their case.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A) when an ex-parte order was passed due to the counsel's absence.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH ‘B’, KOLKATA
Before: Sri A.T. Varkey, Hon’ble & Sri Manish Borad, Hon’ble
Before Sri A.T. Varkey, Hon’ble Judicial Member & Sri Manish Borad, Hon’ble Accountant Member [THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT] Assessment Year: 2013-14 Allworth Developers Pvt. Ltd..…………………………………….……………………..………..................Appellant 626, Dakshindari Road, Kolkata – 700 048. [PAN :AAJCA 9920 B vs] ITO, Ward-4(3), Kolkata..…....…………………………………………………..……..............................Respondent Appearances by: Shri Manoj Kataruka, AR appeared on behalf of the Appellant. Shri Tushar Dhawal Singh, Addl. CIT, DR appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : September 09, 2021 Date of pronouncing the order : September 09, 2021 ORDER
Per Manish Board, AM:
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee for the assessment year 2013-14 against the order dated 27.03.2017 of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) – 2, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’).
At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that this impugned order of the CIT(A) is an ex-parte order. The ld. Counsel has further submitted that the absence of the counsel of the assessee on the date fixed for hearing before the CIT(A) was not intentional. The ld. Counsel has further submitted that the assessee has a fair case on merits and the assessee may be given an opportunity to present his case before the CIT(A). The ld. DR, on the other hand, has relied upon the record of the CIT(A). 3. After considering the rival contentions of the ld. representatives of the parties, we are of the view that interest of justice will be well-served if the assessee is given an opportunity to present his case before the CIT(A). In view of this, the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for Allworth Developers Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year: 2013-14 adjudication afresh. Needless to say that the CIT(A) will give proper opportunity to the assessee to present his case and thereafter, to decide the matter by way of a speaking order.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 9th September, 2021. Sd/- Sd/- [A.T. Varkey] [Manish Borad] Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated : 09.09.2021 Biswajit, Sr. P.S. Copy of the order forwarded to:
1. 1. M/s. Allworth Developers Pvt. Ltd.
2. ITO, Ward-4(3), Kolkata 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR),
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S B.K. Agency Under The Proprietor Of Bhola Prasad vs. The Chief Commissioner, CGSTPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026