What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT found that the assessee should be given another opportunity to present their case. Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(Appeals) for a fresh adjudication.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(Appeals) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-appearance. The assessee then filed an appeal before the ITAT against this dismissal.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte dismissal of the appeal by the CIT(Appeals) was justified and if the assessee should be granted another opportunity to be heard.

Amma Construction India Pvt Ltd… vs DCIT | ITAT Bangalore 2019

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

Before: SHRI A.K. GARODIA & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridhar, Advocate

For Respondent: Shri Ujjwal Kumar, JCIT (D.R)

Hearing: 13.08.2019Pronounced: 20.09.2019

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 (Appeals)-1, 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

CIT(Appeals) has posted the case on 7.12.2018 and on the same date the appeal was dismissed for non- prosecution. We considering the facts and circumstances are of the opinion that the revenue shall not be at loss if one more opportunity is provided to the assessee. Accordingly to meet the ends of justice, we restore the disputed issue to the file of the CIT(Appeals) to adjudicate afresh and pass a reasoned order and the assessee shall be provided with adequate opportunity of hearing and co- operate in submitting the information for early disposal of the appeal and allow the grounds of appeal for statistical purposes.

3. In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

AMMA CONSTRUCTION INDIA PVT LTD.,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1(1)(1), BENGALURU

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