BABITA KUMARI,GAYA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, PATNA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 153/PAT/2023Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 January 2025AY 2013-14Bench: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-President (KZ), Shri Sanjay Awasthi (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed for statistical purposes

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had not appeared before the Assessing Officer or the CIT(Appeals). While acknowledging the adjournment request, the Tribunal found it necessary to remit the matter back to the CIT(Appeals) to provide the assessee with another opportunity to be heard. The assessee was cautioned to cooperate with the proceedings.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed five appeals against the orders of the CIT(Appeals) for various assessment years. The assessee's counsel sought an adjournment stating that insolvency proceedings were pending before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT). However, no proof of these proceedings was provided.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeals should be remitted back to the CIT(Appeals) to provide the assessee with an opportunity to be heard, given the pendency of insolvency proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA-PATNA ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-(KZ) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Heard together (3 matters)

ITA No. 153/PAT/2023
I.T.A. No. 147/PAT/2023
I.T.A. No. 154/PAT/2023

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Per Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-President (KZ):- The present five appeals bearing 146, 147, 153 & 154/PAT/2023 are directed at the instance of assessee against the orders of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Patna-3, all dated 22nd March, 2023 passed for Assessment Years 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20, 2013-14 & 2018-19 respectively.

2.

Ld. Counsel for the assessee filed a petition for adjournment saying that the matter is pending before the National Company Law Tribunal, since the appellant filed Insolvency Proceedings under Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

3.

On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative submitted that the assessee did not appear before the ld. Assessing Officer as well as ld. CIT(Appeals). Therefore, he pleaded to remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals).

4.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee except filing the adjournment petition. Ld. Counsel for the assessee-petitioner has not filed any proof to show that the proceedings are pending before the NCLT. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that it is a fit case to remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to provide one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, we also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the 2 , 146/PAT/2023 (A.Ys 2016-17 &. 2017-2018) (A.Y. 2019-2020)

1.

(A.Y. 2018-19) Babita Kumari proceedings before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) failing which the Ld. CIT(Appeals) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits based on the materials available on the record. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →