What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that the CIT(A) failed to provide a proper opportunity of hearing and did not consider the assessee's submissions, violating principles of natural justice. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed without considering written submissions filed by the assessee's AR. The CIT(A) was also absent on the scheduled hearing date.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) followed principles of natural justice by not considering the assessee's submissions and affording a proper opportunity of hearing.

Bharat Scientific House vs ACIT | ITAT Kolkata 2020

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B”, BENCH KOLKATA

Before: SHRI A.T. VARKEY, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM

For Respondent: Shri Vijay Shankar, CIT

Hearing: 09/01/2020Pronounced: 29/01/2020

आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A.L. Saini, AM:

The captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year 2012-13, is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-9, Kolkata in appeal no. 36/CIT(A)-9/Cir-31/2015-16/Kol, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the “Act”) dated 12/03/2015.

2. We have heard ld DR for the Revenue and perused the material available on record. At the time of hearing none appeared on behalf of assessee in spite of issuance of notice for hearing.At the outset itself, we note that assessee’s main grievances which are mentioned in ground nos 1 and 2 raised by him, is that when the appeal was scheduled for hearing on 30.01.2018, at 11.30 A.M. the ld. CIT(A) was absent in his office. The A.R. of the assessee appeared on 30.01.2018 in the office of ld. CIT(A) and filed written submission also. These written submissions

Bharat Scientific House Firm Assessment Year:2012-13 were not considered while adjudicating the assessee’s appeal; which is against the principle of natural justice. Ground nos. 1and 2 raised by the assessee are reproduced below:

For that during the appeal hearing the Advocate of the assessee submitted written submission with papers and particulars and moreover the appellant authority had sufficient time before final order to call the assessee to get clarified everything and addition of every amount is arbitrary, illegal and in law and should therefore be allowed.

The appellate authority adjourned the appeal proceedings on 30.01.2018 at 11.30 a.m. he was absent on the day and time and Mr. D.P. Bagchi without calling the assessee to submit the Books of accounts and documents, the order of appeal, dismission of the appeal is arbitrary, illegal and void in law.

From the grievances raised in the grounds of appeal as mentioned above, it is implied that assessee is aggrieved by the action of ld. CIT(A) for not giving proper opportunity to the assessee and has passed the order without even considering the written submission filed by the assessee. In such a scenario, it cannot be said that the ld. CIT(A) has passed the order after giving the proper opportunity of hearing which is essential for adjudicating the appeal. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter 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. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

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

Order pronounced in the Court on 29.01.2020

BHARAT SCIENTIFIC HOUSE,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 31, KOLKATA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments