SNEHANSHU BHATTACHARYYA,BURDWAN vs. I.T.O.,WARD-1(1), BURDWAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2667/KOL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata18 February 2020AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order and remitted the matter back for fresh disposal on merits. The CIT(A) failed to follow the procedural requirements for disposing of an appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte for non-prosecution. The CIT(A) did not comply with the requirements of Section 250(6) of the IT Act by not providing reasons for the decision.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) followed the prescribed procedure for disposing of an appeal, and if not, whether the ex-parte order for non-prosecution was valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH ‘(SMC

Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap(KZ)]

order : February 18, 2020 ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) - Burdwan dated 03.12.2019 passed ex-parte whereby he dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution.

2.

The assessee in the present case is an individual who is engaged in the business of mobile recharging. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by him on 31.10.2013 declaring a total income of Rs. 8,69,470/-. In the assessment completed u/s 143(3), the total income of the assessee was determined by the AO at Rs. 19,25,067/- after making inter alia an addition of Rs. 10,48,950/- on account of the alleged unexplained investment made by the assessee in the purchase of land.

3.

Against the order passed by the AO u/s 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) and since there was no compliance on the part of the assessee to the notices issued by him

1.

Assessment Year: 2013-14 Snehangshu Bhattacharyya fixing the said appeal for hearing from time to time, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution vide his appellate order dated 03.12.2019 passed ex-parte. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.

4.

At the time of hearing fixed in this case today, none has appeared on behalf of the assessee. The Ld. DR however has fairly pointed out that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) vide his impugned order passed ex-parte for non-prosecution without going into the merit of the case. As per the provisions of sub- section (6) of section 250, the Ld. CIT(A) was required to dispose of the appeal of the assessee vide an order in writing stating the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for the decision. It is observed that the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) does not comply with these requirements. I, therefore, set aside the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) ex-parte and remit the matter back to him for disposing of the appeal of the assessee afresh on merit.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 18th February, 2020.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →