BHUPENDRA RAGHUVANSHI,INDORE vs. DCIT-ACIT-1(1),INDORE, INDORE

PDF

ITA 458/IND/2024Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 January 2025AY 2017-18Bench: AO and also filed first-appeal. But, however, the previous counsel never informed the assessee about fixation of hearings nor made any representation before CIT(A). Further, the CIT(A) has mentioned to have sent email also to another email id: bstkissanmp@gmail.com which again did not reach to assessee's knowledge. Therefore, the assessee could not attend hearings fixed by CIT(A), which has led to the passing of ex-parte order by CIT(A). Ld. AR further submits that the assessee is ready and1 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The assessee appealed an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2017-18. The assessee contended that notices for hearing were sent to incorrect or non-accessible email IDs of a previous counsel, leading to their inability to attend hearings and make representations before the CIT(A).

Held

The Tribunal, considering the principle of natural justice, remanded the matter back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, directing the CIT(A) to provide adequate opportunity of hearing. The assessee was also directed to ensure participation without seeking unnecessary adjournments.

Key Issues

Whether the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order, passed without proper service of hearing notices to the assessee, violated the principles of natural justice and warranted a remand for fresh adjudication.

Sections Cited

143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

For Appellant: Shri Milind Wadhwani, AR

For Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR

Hearing: 08.01.2025Pronounced: 30.01.2025

आदेश/ O R D E R

Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:

Feeling aggrieved by order of first-appeal dated 30.03.2024 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Bengaluru [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 30.12.2019 passed by learned DCIT/ACIT-1(1), Indore [“AO”] u/s 143(3) of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2017-18, the assessee has filed this appeal on the grounds mentioned in Appeal Memo (Form No. 36).

Ld. AR for assessee submits that the CIT(A), while conducting first- appeal, has sent notices of hearing to e-mail address: dlsaraf32@gmail.com which belonged to assessee’s previous counsel Shri Dau Lal Saraf, CA who represented assessee before AO and also filed first-appeal. But, however, the previous counsel never informed the assessee about fixation of hearings nor made any representation before CIT(A). Further, the CIT(A) has mentioned to have sent email also to another email id: bstkissanmp@gmail.com which again did not reach to assessee’s knowledge. Therefore, the assessee could not attend hearings fixed by CIT(A), which has led to the passing of ex-parte order by CIT(A). Ld. AR further submits that the assessee is ready and willing to make representation before CIT(A) if an opportunity is given and prays that the present matter should be remanded to the file of CIT(A) for a proper adjudication of the grounds/issues raised by assessee in first-appeal.

Ld. DR for revenue agrees with the prayer of Ld. AR but makes a request to direct the assessee to represent his case before CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments.

Considering above submissions and also having regard to the principle of natural justice and fair play, we deem it fit to remand this matter back to the file of CIT(A) for adjudication afresh. The CIT(A) shall give necessary opportunity of hearing to assessee and pass an appropriate order uninfluenced by his earlier order. The assessee is also directed to ensure participation in the hearings as may be fixed by CIT(A) and do not seek