What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(Appeals) had passed an ex-parte order despite the assessee filing submissions. To ensure justice, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(Appeals) order and restored the issue for fresh adjudication.

The assessee's appeal was against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(Appeals). The assessee contended that written submissions were filed but not considered, and requested another opportunity to present their case.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in passing an ex-parte order without considering the assessee's written submissions and granting adequate opportunity for hearing.

Narasappagala vs Deputy Commissiner of Income Tax… | ITAT Bangalore 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCHES “ C ” BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI B.R. BASKARAN & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar,C.A

For Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT (D.R)

Hearing: 10.12.2019Pronounced: 13.12.2019

O R D E R

PER SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM :

The assessee has filed an appeal against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax – 7, Bangalore passed under Section 143(3) and 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act').

At the time of hearing, the learned Authorised Representative submitted that the CIT(Appeals) has passed exparte order irrespective of the facts that the assessee has filed written submissions. Hence prayed for one more opportunity before the appellate authority to substantiate the grounds of appeal

with evidences. Contra, the learned Departmental Representative supported the orders of CIT(Appeals).

3. We heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. Prima facie, we found that the CIT(Appeals) has passed exparte order and as per para 2 of the CIT(Appeals) order, the CIT(Appeals) has issued Notice dt.2.11.2018 fixing the case on 5.11.2018. Whereas the learned Authorised Representative of the assessee appeared and requested for adjournment and the case was posted on 12/12/2018 and the assessee has filed written submissions. The learned Authorised Representative submissions are that the assessee has good case on merits and CIT(Appeals) has not considered certain vital facts in disposal of appeal and prayed for one more opportunity before the CIT(Appeals). We found CIT (Appeals) has granted only two dates of hearing to the assessee. Hence to meet the ends of justice, we grant one more opportunity to the assessee to appear before appellate authority and set aside the order of the CIT(Appeals) and restore the entire disputed issue to the file of CIT(Appeals) to adjudicate afresh and pass a speaking order. The assessee should also be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall co-operate in submitting the information and allow the grounds of appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes.

NARASAPPAGALA,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSINER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-7(2)(1), BANGALORE

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments