SMT. NAMITA LAKHOTIA,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-22(4), KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the non-receipt of the notice of hearing constituted a reasonable cause for the assessee's absence. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex parte as the assessee did not appear for the hearing. The assessee claimed that they did not receive the notice of hearing, which was a reasonable cause for their absence.
What were the issues?
Whether the ex parte order passed by the CIT(A) without affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee is sustainable.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B(SMC
Before: Shri A. T. Varkey, JM]
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-6, Kolkata dated 18-07-2019 for the assessment year 2014-15.
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 without affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. According to Ld. AR, the Ld. CIT(A) has noted that the last hearing was on 12.07.2019 and since neither the appellant nor the authorized representative appeared so the case was adjudicated on the basis of the written submissions and documentary evidence filed before him. According to Ld. AR, since the assessee did not receive the notice of hearing so, he could not appear at the time of hearing on 12.07.2019 before the Ld. CIT(A) which is a reasonable cause for not appearing before the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, he prayed that one more opportunity be given to the assessee so that the appeal can be pursued before the Ld. CIT(A) on merits. Per contra, the Ld. DR opposed the plea of the Ld. AR and wanted us not to interfere in the order of the Ld. CIT(A).
After hearing both the parties, it is noted from the impugned order that the appeal was fixed lastly on 12.07.2019 and since the assessee did not receive the notice of hearing the Ld. AR of the assessee did not appear prompting the Ld. CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal without hearing the assessee. Since the notice of hearing was not received by the assessee, Namita Lakhotia., AY- 2014-15 the Ld. AR of the assessee could not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) which according to me, is a reasonable cause for not appearing before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, I set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and remand the appeal back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the appeal on merits after hearing the Ld. AR of the assessee and the assessee is directed to be diligent in future and appear before the Ld. CIT(A) without fail.
In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 29.01.2020.
Sd/-(Aby. T. Varkey) Judicial Member Dated :29.01.2020 Jd.(Sr.P.S.) Copy of the order forwarded to:
Appellant – Smt. Namita Lakhotia, 24, Hara Chandra Mullick Street, Kolkata-700 005. Respondent – ITO, Ward-22(4), Kolkata. 2 3. CIT(A)-6, Kolkata (sent through e-mail)
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Mahaveer Ispat Traders vs. Principal Commissioner Dgst Delhi Department Of Trade And Taxes Gnctd & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Gagan Bihari Rout@Gagan Rout vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026