Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2017-18. The assessee contended that they could not represent their case before the CIT(A) due to circumstances beyond their control and that the order was vitiated on account of a violation of the principle of natural justice.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee was not given sufficient opportunity to be heard and the CIT(A) did not discuss the case on merits. This was considered a violation of the principle of natural justice. Therefore, the Tribunal decided to set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remit the matter back for de novo adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) without providing sufficient opportunity to be heard violated the principles of natural justice.
Sections Cited
147
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT
Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI & SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA
Assessment Year: 2017-18 Laxmikant Kakubhai Ruparel Income Tax Officer, wd – 1, Shaz No.1, Zanda Chowk, Adipur Vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Gujarat - 370205 Department, Gandhidham PAN No.: ADPPR9042M (अपीलाथ�/Assessee) : (��यथ�/Respondent) िनधा�रतीक�ओरसे/Assessee by : Shri Pratik A. Kanabar, Ld. AR राज�वक�ओरसे/Revenue by : Shri Vijay Kumar Singh, Ld. CIT(DR) सुनवाईक�तारीख /Date of Hearing : 04/11/2025 घोषणाक�तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 04/11/2025 ORDER Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee, against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal, Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] dated 12.09.2025, arising in the matter of order passed by the assessing officer u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as “the Act”), relevant to the Assessment Year 2017-18.
At the outset itself, the Learned Counsel for the assessee assailed the impugned order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and the order being an ex-parte order, stood vitiated on account of Laxmikant K. Ruparel violation of principle of natural justice. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee could not file the documentary evidences before the Ld.CIT(A) due to circumstances beyond its control, however, the assessee sought to be ask for adjournment during the appellate proceedings but did not file the required details and documents for adjudication on merit, therefore, the Ld.CIT(A) passed ex-parte order. The Ld. Counsel submitted that the matter may be remitted back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, as the assessee now ready to file required details and documents before the Ld.CIT(A).
On the other hand, the Learned DR for the Revenue did not have any objection, if the matter is restored back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A).
We have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld CIT(A) and other materials brought on record. We note that in the assessee’s case under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s 147 of the Act and the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex parte order and non-speaking order, therefore, we do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee.
Considering the above facts, we note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A). We note that the ld. CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits based on the material available before him hence it is a violation of principle of natural justice. We note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter Page 2 of 3 back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 04/11/2025.