What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) was directed to provide a proper and effective opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte without providing an adequate opportunity of hearing. The assessee contended that they were deprived of an effective hearing and requested the matter be restored.

Hans Ram vs ITO | s.143(3) | ITAT Jaipur 2017

Q: What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in deciding the appeal ex-parte without providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC

Before: SHRI BHAGCHANDvk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 182/JP/2017

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@

Hearing: 06/04/2017Pronounced: 07/04/2017

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR Jh Hkkxpan] ys[kk lnL;] ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 182/JP/2017 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2012-13 cuke Hans Ram, Income Tax Officer, Vs. H.No. 112, Milakpur Gujar, Ward- Bhiwadi, Bhiwadi, Tehsil- Tijara, Alwar. Alwar. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AKMPR 8193 D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri P.C. Parwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Raj Mehra (Addl.CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 06/04/2017 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 07/04/2017 vkns'k@ ORDER

PER: BHAGCHAND, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee arises against the order dated 01/02/2017 passed by the ld. CIT(A), Alwar for the A.Y. 2012-13, wherein the assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- “1. The ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in deciding the appeal ex-parte without providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

ITA 182/JP/2017_ 2 Hans Ram Vs ITO

The ld. CIT(A) has erred on fact and in law in not deciding the various ground of appeal raised before him on merit.”

In this case, both the grounds of appeal are interlined and against

deciding the appeal ex-parte without providing adequate opportunity of

hearing as well as without merit of the case to the assessee.

In this case the return was e-filed on 19/12/2012 and the

assessment was finalized U/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in

short the Act) at the income of Rs. 48,66,060/-.

The assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and at the

outset of hearing, the ld AR has submitted that the ld. CIT(A) had

passed ex parte order and the assessee was deprived of the adequate

and effective opportunity of being heard and he prayed that the matter

may be restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for deciding on merit.

The ld. DR was not having any serious objection for this proposal

of the ld. AR. Therefore, considering all the facts and circumstances of

the case and in the interest of justice and equity, the issue raised in the

appeal are restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh

adjudication.The ld. CIT(A) shall provide proper and effective

ITA 182/JP/2017_ 3 Hans Ram Vs ITO opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, the issue raised

in the appeal is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A).

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

purposes only.

Order pronounced in the open court on 07/04/2017.

Sd/- ¼Hkkxpan½ (BHAGCHAND) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 07th April, 2017

*Ranjan आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Shri Hans Ram, Alwar. 1. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ITO, Ward-Bhiwadi, Alwar. 2. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 3. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A) 4. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 5. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 182/JP/2017) 6. vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत

HANS RAM,JAIPUR vs. ITO, ALWAR

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Latest GST High Court judgments