Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte order passed by the Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Chennai, for AY 2017-2018. The assessee contended that the order was passed without a reasonable opportunity to present their case and furnish supporting documents. The revenue argued that the assessee was given ample opportunities.
Held
The Tribunal observed that while the assessee had been provided multiple opportunities, they had not responded on most occasions. However, it was also noted that the lower appellate authority had not followed the procedural requirements of Section 250(6) of the I.T. Act by not disposing of the appeal after considering all points. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the issues were restored to the AO.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee was denied a reasonable opportunity of being heard by the lower appellate authority, and whether the order was passed in accordance with the provisions of the IT Act.
Sections Cited
250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR
(�नधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Satyapriya Jena Vs ITO, Ward-2(5), Cuttack 2R 166, L T Colony Choudwar, Cuttack 754028 PAN No. : ANTPJ 3999 B (अपीलाथ� /Appellant) .. (��यथ� / Respondent) �नधा�रती क� ओर से /Assessee by : Shri P.R.Mohanty, Adv राज�व क� ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Vijaya Singh, ld Sr DR सुनवाई क� तार�ख / Date of Hearing : 1 /12/2025 : 1 /12/2025 घोषणा क� तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench :
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Addl/JCIT(A)-1, Chennai dated 01/08/2025 in Appeal No.CIT(A), Cuttack/10627/2019-20 for the assessment year 2017-2018.
Shri P.R.Mohanty, appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Vijaya Singh, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue.
At the time of hearing, ld AR of the assessee submitted that the ld Addl/JCIT(A)-1 Chennai has passed the order exparte without giving reasonable opportunity of the assessee. He submitted that before the AO, no documents and details in support of the issues were furnished despite being opportunity to the assessee. He prayed that if one more opportunity is granted, the assessee would be in a position to cooperate in the set aside proceedings before the AO with all documentary evidence in support of the grounds of appeal
4. In reply, ld Sr DR submitted that the assessee has been given ample opportunity to putforth his case before the ld CIT(A) as has been evident from the order of the ld CIT(A).
5. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the ld Addl/JCIT(A), NFAC clearly shows that four opportunities have been provided to the assessee but except one occasion, there was no response to the said notices. Ld Addl/JCIT(A) has also not passed the order as per the provisions of section 250(6) of I.T. Act, which requires the Ld. JCIT(A) to dispose off the appeal in writing after stating the points for determination and then pass an order on "each of the points which arose for consideration". It is also seen that despite giving various notices by the AO, the assessee has not complied the same with any evidence and bank statements as required. In the interest of justice, as prayed by ld AR of the assessee,the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the ld AO to decide the issue afresh as per law after providing reasonable opportunity to the appellant assessee with a cost of Rs.10000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) to be paid to ITAT Bar Association and receipt of payment be furnished to the AO. With these directions, the issues are restored to the file of the AO.
In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 1/12/2025.