EXPERIS IT PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-2(1), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1438/KOL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 May 2020AY 2013-142 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT held that the CIT(A) order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the case was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after providing the assessee an adequate opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee did not appear before the CIT(A), leading to an ex-parte order dismissing their appeal. The ITAT noted that the CIT(A) did not adjudicate the case on merits, which is impermissible.

What were the issues?

Whether an ex-parte order by the CIT(A) without adjudicating on merits violates principles of natural justice. Whether the case should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’ble & Sri S.S. Godara, Hon’ble

order : May 29th, 2020 ORDER Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, AM :- This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 2, Kolkata, (hereinafter the “ld.CIT(A)”), passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’), dt. 05/04/2019, for the Assessment Year 2013-14.

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee. There is no petition for adjournment either. Under these circumstances, we dispose off the case ex-parte on merits qua the assessee after hearing the ld. Departmental Representative.

3.

Heard the ld. D/R. On perusing the order passed by the ld. CIT(A), we find that the assessee has not appeared before the ld. CIT(A) and hence an ex-parte order was passed dismissing the appeal of the assessee. We find that the ld. CIT(A) has not disposed off the case on merits. This is not permissible in law. Hence, we deem it fit to restore the issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A), for fresh adjudication, in accordance with law, after giving the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, on the grounds of violations of the principles of natural justice.

4.

Before parting, it is noted that the order is being pronounced after ninety (90) days of hearing. However, taking note of the extraordinary situation in the light of the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown, the period of lockdown days need to be excluded. For coming to such a conclusion, I rely upon the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. JSW Limited in & 6103/Mum/2018, Assessment Year 2013-14, order dt. 14th May, 2020.

1.

Assessment Year: 2013-14 Experis IT Private Limited 5. In the result, appeal of In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Kolkata, the Kolkata, the 29th day of May, 2020. Sd/- Sd/- [S.S. Godara] [J. Sudhakar Reddy J. Sudhakar Reddy] Judicial Member Accountant Member countant Member Dated : 29.05.2020 {SC SPS} Copy of the order forwarded to:

1. 1. Experis IT Private Limited J3, Block GP Sector V Salt Lake Kolkata – 700 091 2. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Kolkata 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata.

5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →