SHARAFUDEEN UCHUMAL KURUVANKANDY ,KANNUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KANNUR
Facts
The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order for assessment year 2014-2015, contending that the CIT(A) decided the matter without hearing the assessee and ignored an adjournment request accompanied by a medical certificate.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) did not deal with the case on merits as per Section 250(6) of the Act. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for a fresh examination in accordance with law, with a direction to provide the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) can pass an order without granting a hearing to the assessee or ignoring a valid adjournment request accompanied by a medical certificate, and whether such an order can be upheld if it does not deal with the merits of the case.
Sections Cited
250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN
Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Judicial Member ITA No.362/Coch/2024 : Asst.Year 2014-2015 Sri.Sharafudeen Uchumal The Income Tax Officer Kuruvankandy Ward - 2 v. Sharara Bunglow, Kuyyali Road Kannur. Kannur – 670 101. PAN : AFJPK1470J. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by :--- None --- Respondent by : Smt.Leenalal, Sr.AR Date of Pronouncement : 22.01.2025 Date of Hearing : 30.12.2024 O R D E R Per Prakash Chand Yadav, JM : The present appeal of the assessee is arising from the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dated 27th February, 2024 having DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1061559569(1) and it relates to the assessment year 2014-2015.
The assessee has raised four grounds of appeal. In ground No.2, the assessee has contended that the CIT(A) has erred in deciding the matter without hearing the assessee it is next contended that that the CIT(A) has further erred in ignoring the adjournment request made by the assessee, which adjournment request was accompanied with the medical certificate.
2 ITA No.362/Coch/2024. Sri.Sharafudeen Uchumal Kuruvankandy.
Today when the matter has been called for hearing. No body appears from the side of assessee, despite the service of notice by the registry. Therefore, we are adjudicating the appeal as per law.
The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the orders of the authorities below.
After considering submissions made by the DR and perusing the material available on record, we observe that the ld.CIT(A) has not dealt with the merits of the case, in terms of the provisions of section sec.250(6) of the Act. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we remit this matter to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for examining afresh in accordance with law. Needless to say, the ld.CIT(A) will afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 22nd day of January, 2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (Inturi Rama Rao) (Prakash Chand Yadav) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cochin; Dated : 22nd January, 2025. Devadas G*
3 ITA No.362/Coch/2024. Sri.Sharafudeen Uchumal Kuruvankandy.
Copy to : 1. The Appellant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT, Cochin. 4. The DR, ITAT, Cochin. 5. Guard File. Asst.Registrar/ITAT, Cochin
