ABHIYAN CARGO PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O, WD.15(1), KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) passed an ex parte order without affording a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The matter was set aside and remanded for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex parte. The assessee claimed they did not receive proper notice due to a change in address, and the address used by the CIT(A) was the PAN address, not the current one.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex parte without ensuring proper service of notice and affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH: KOLKATA
Before: Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A.L. Saini, AM]
ORDER Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-5, Kolkata dated 19.05.2017 for AY 2013-14.
At the outset itself, the Ld. AR drew our attention to the fact that the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is an ex parte order passed without affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. According to Ld. AR, the Ld. CIT(A) has noted in para 2 of his order that the last hearing was fixed on 15.05.2017 and since neither the appellant nor the authorized representative appeared before him, he dismissed the appeal without affording further opportunity of being heard. And it was brought to our notice that while the appeal was pending before the Ld. CIT(A) there was change in address of assessee and we note that the address in Form 36 filed before the Tribunal shows a different address i.e. 46A, Rafi Ahmed Kidwai Road, 3rd Floor, Kolkata-700 016 whereas the Ld. CIT(A) has noted the assessee’s address as 12, Ambassador Apartment, 61A, Park Street, Kolkata-700 016 which, according to assessee, was as per the PAN address. The assessee has categorically denied receiving any notices from Ld. CIT(A), so without proof of notice being served upon the assessee, it cannot be presumed that assessee was not interested to pursue the Abhiyan Cargo Pvt. Ltd.., Assessment Year: 2013-14 appeal. Taking note of the aforesaid facts and since the Ld. CIT(A) has not passed the appellate order on merits, and also there is change of address of the assessee and the assessee was not heard by the Ld. CIT(A) before passing the impugned order, we are of the considered view that assessee did not get proper opportunity before the First Appellate Authority. Therefore, we are inclined to set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in accordance to law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to participate in the appellate proceeding before the Ld. CIT(A) diligently and furnish the correct postal address to Ld. CIT(A).
In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 18th March, 2020.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sutlej Textiles And Industries Limited vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026