PALM HOUSE CO OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ITO 18(3)(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4405/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 November 2019AY 2010-113 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found sufficient reason for the assessee's non-appearance before the CIT(A). In the interest of justice, the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) was set aside, and the matter was restored for fresh decision after providing a proper opportunity to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a cooperative housing society, is aggrieved by an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) for assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. The assessee claimed that the notice for the hearing before the CIT(A) was not served, leading to their inability to appear.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without providing a proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI R.C. SHARMA

Hearing: 06/11/2019Pronounced: 13/11

आदेश / O R D E R PER R.C. SHARMA(A.M.)

1.

These are the appeals filed by the assessee against ex- parte order of the CIT(A) for the A.Ys 2010-11 and 2011-12. 2. In both these appeals assessee is basically aggrieved by the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) without giving due and proper opportunity to the assessee .

& 4406//Mum/2018. Palm House Co-operative Housing Society, Mumbai. - 2 -

3.

I have heard the rival contentions and record perused and found that assessee is a society registered under cooperative housing Act, 1960 and it is deriving income from its members as contribution and income from other sources. During the course of assessment proceeding the A.O made addition on account of transfer fee, donation, interest income etc. Against, which assessee filed an appeal before CIT(A). It was argued by the Ld. AR that notice issued fixing the hearing was not served on the assessee and therefore assessee could not appeal before the CIT(A) and only on receipt of demand notice it came to know that appeal has been dismissed. I found that there was sufficient reason for not appearing before the CIT(A). In the substantial interest of justice, I set aside the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) and the matter is restore to the file of the CIT(A) over deciding afresh after giving due and proper opportunity to the assessee. Assessee is also direct to appear before CIT(A) within 60 days from the date of receipt of this order. I direct accordingly. & 4406//Mum/2018. Palm House Co-operative Housing Society, Mumbai. - 3 -

4.

In the result both the appeals are allowed in part for statistical purposes.

This Order pronounced in Open Court on 13/11/2019

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →