M/S ANUVARATH APPARELS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1)(1), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 117/BANG/2019Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 October 2019AY 2014-152 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that even in the absence of the assessee, the appeal should be decided on merits rather than dismissed in limine. The matter was restored back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision after providing adequate opportunity.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte as the assessee failed to appear on two scheduled hearing dates. The assessee argued that they should have been given more opportunities and the appeal should have been decided on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without deciding on merits, and whether sufficient opportunities were provided to the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrasekhar, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal, Addl. CIT (DR)
Hearing: 26.09.2019Pronounced: 11.10.2019

O R D E R

Per Shri A.K. Garodia, Accountant Member

1.

This appeal is filed by the assessee which is directed against the ex-parte order of ld. CIT(A)-1, Bangalore dated 02.11.2018 for Assessment Year 2014-15.

2.

At the very outset, it was submitted by ld. AR of assessee that only two dates of hearing were fixed by ld. CIT(A) and the assessee could not appear on these dates but ld. CIT(A) should have provided some more opportunities. He also submitted that even in the absence of the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) should have decided the appeal on merit instead of dismissing the same in limine. He submitted that the matter should be restored back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for fresh decision after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to assessee. The ld. DR of revenue supported the order of ld. CIT(A). 3. We have considered the rival submissions. We find that as per the order of ld. CIT(A), two dates of hearing were fixed by ld. CIT(A) on 27.09.2018 and 22.10.2018 and it is noted by him in his order that nobody appeared before him on these two dates and no adjournment was sought. This is by now a settled position of law and even if nobody appeared before any quasi judicial

Page 2 of 2 authority, the appeal should be decided on merit instead of dismissing the appeal in limine. The ld. CIT(A) has not done so and hence, we feel it proper to restore back the matter to the file of ld. CIT(A) for fresh decision after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to both sides. In view of this decision, no adjudication on merit is called for at the present stage.

4.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →