JET AIRWAYS EMPLOYEES CO-OP.CREDIT SOC. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO - WD- 24(2)(2), MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal decided to give the assessee one more opportunity to present its case. The issue was restored to the file of the CIT(A) for a fresh decision after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
What were the facts?
The assessee, Jet Airways Employees Co-op Credit Soc. Ltd., filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order. The assessee did not appear for hearings before the CIT(A) and the ITAT. The ITAT noted the lack of response from the assessee.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee was provided with a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Whether the appeal should be decided ex-parte due to the assessee's non-appearance.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “F”, MUMBAI
Before: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Ram Lal Negi
Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member
The captioned appeal filed by the assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2012-13 is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-36, Mumbai, dated 28.03.2018 which in turn arises out of an order passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter "the Act") dated 30.03.2015.
Jet Airways Employees Co-op Credit Soc. Ltd.
At the time of hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor was any application filed by the assessee seeking adjournment. We therefore, proceed to dispose of the appeal after hearing the learned DR and on the basis of the material available on record.
The learned DR pointed out that the case was heard ex-parte qua the assessee by the learned CIT(A) as the assessee failed to respond or attend the on the dates of hearing. Similarly, the assessee has not shown any compliance before ITAT. The learned DR therefore, prayed that suitable decision may be taken in this regard.
We have heard the learned DR and gone through the material available on record. We are of the opinion that it would be in the interest of justice and fair play if the assessee is given one more opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A). Accordingly, we restore the issue to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the appeal as per the facts and law after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purpose.
Above decision was pronounced in the open court at the conclusion of hearing on 7th August, 2019
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Capri Global Capital LTD Through Represented By Its Law Officer Mr. Varun Kaljoria vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Principal SecretaryMadhya Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Sri Tatiparthy Venkata Swamy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 25 Oct 2026
- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026