M/S. TECHNO SERVICES,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 63(3), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1986/KOL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 November 2020AY 2013-142 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 tribunal directed the CIT(A) to provide a proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant and consider all evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex parte as no one appeared on behalf of the appellant. The CIT(A) confirmed the AO's order. The assessee then filed an appeal before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in deciding the appeal ex parte without affording a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, AM & Smt. Madhumita Roy, JM ]

ORDER

Per Smt. Madhumita Roy, JM

1.

The instant appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order dated 27-06-2018 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-19, Kolkata arising out of assessment order dated 31-03-2016 passed by the ITO(The AO), Wd-63(3), Kol u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “ the Act”) for the Assessment Years 2013-14.

2.

At the time of hearing of the instant appeal, none appeared on behalf of the appellant. However from the records, it appears that the impugned order dated 27-06-2018 was passed ex parte. The Ld. CIT(A), following the judgment of CIT vs. Multi Plan India (P) Ltd reported in 38 ITD 320 (Del) decided the matter ex parte by confirming the order passed by the Ld.AO since none appeared on behalf of the appellant. It, therefore, appears admittedly that for some reasons of the other the case of the appellant was not duly presented before the Ld. CIT(A). Hence, for the ends of justice, we find it fit and proper to set aside the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh upon giving a proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant and upon considering the evidence on record and any other evidence, which the appellant may choose to file at the time of hearing of the appeal. We

M/s. Techno Services also make it clear that the appellant would co-operate with the Ld. CIT(A) without asking for any unnecessary adjournment. No order as to cost.

3.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order is pronounced in the open court on 18th November, 2020 Sd/- Sd/- (J.Sudhakar Reddy) (Madhumita Roy) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated : 18th November, 2020 **PP(Sr.P.S.) Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Respective Appellant/Assessee: M/s. Techno Services, GD-66, Salt Lake Sector-III, Kolkata-106. Respondent/Revenue: The I.T.O., Ward 63(3). Kolkata 2 3. CIT(A), 4. CIT- , 5. DR, ITAT, Kolkata.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →