Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the learned CIT(A) for the assessment year 2015-16, as the assessee failed to appear or submit written submissions despite multiple opportunities. The assessee then filed an appeal before the ITAT, seeking one more opportunity.
Held
The Tribunal acknowledged that the CIT(A)'s order was ex-parte. Following the principles of natural justice, the Tribunal decided to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remit the matter back for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case after an ex-parte order was passed by the CIT(A) due to non-compliance.
Sections Cited
ITBA Portal
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO
This appeal preferred by the assessee is against the impugned order dated 12/01/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2015–16.
2. As stated by the learned CIT(A) in its order, the assessee during the first appellate proceedings, did not file written submissions along with Form no.35. Statutory notices were issued and served electronically through the ITBA Portal. The learned CIT(A) granted multiple opportunities inasmuch as 6 opportunities were granted, but the assessee chose not to respond to any of 2 Mohd. Irshad Mohd. Latif Ahmad ITA no.74/Nag./2024 the notices issued by the learned CIT(A). Due to non-compliant attitude of the assessee, the learned CIT(A) held that the assessee is not keen in pursing the appeal and not having any documents, explanation and evidence to substantiate its case. Hence, the appeal was dismissed by passing ex-parte order.
3. Before us, the learned A.R. appearing for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order and prayed that one opportunity may be granted by restoring the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) to enable the assessee to furnish the desired documents / evidences to substantiate its case before the learned CIT(A).
On the other hand, the learned D.R. submitted that despite the learned CIT(A) provided sufficient opportunities to the assessee, however, the assessee did not appear before the learned CIT(A) and not furnished relevant details. He strongly supported the orders passed by the learned CIT(A).
We have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. I find that though the learned CIT(A) granted opportunities to the assessee to substantiate its case, ultimately, the order passed by him is an ex-parte order. Therefore, I am of the opinion that by following the principles of natural justice, one opportunity should be given to the assessee to substantiate the case before the learned CIT(A). In view of the above, the order passed by the learned CIT(A) is set aside and remit the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate the matter afresh on merit and in accordance with 3 Mohd. Irshad Mohd. Latif Ahmad ITA no.74/Nag./2024 law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the assessee in this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 10/02/2025