CHANDRA GUPTA SAHU,NEAR BYE-PASS ROAD, SUNDARGARH vs. ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), SAMBALPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 214/CTK/2025Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 July 2025AY 2014-15Bench: S/SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT(KZ) AND RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not respond to notices to substantiate their claim before the AO and CIT(A), leading to the confirmation of additions. Although the assessee did not appear before the Tribunal, to ensure natural justice, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remitted the matter back for a fresh hearing, cautioning the assessee to cooperate.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Chandra Gupta Sahu, filed appeals against the order of CIT(A) confirming additions made by the AO. The assessee did not appear for the hearing before the Tribunal. An adjournment petition was filed by the assessee's AR, but the Tribunal decided to proceed with the case.

What were the issues?

Whether the order of CIT(A) confirming additions made by AO is sustainable when the assessee was not afforded an opportunity of being heard properly heard before the Tribunal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

IT Act sections

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK

Before: S/SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY(KZ) & RAJESH KUMAR

For Respondent: Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborty, CIT DR

O R D E R Per Bench The present appeals are directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NAFC), New Delhi NFAC), Delhi dated 29/01/2025 in Appeal Nos. CIT(A), Bhubaneswar-2/10356/2013-14, and CIT(A), Bhubaneswar- 2/10621/2014-15 passed for Assessment Years 2014-15, 2015-16, respectively.

P a g e 1 | 3 & 215/CTK/2025 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Assessment year: 2015-16

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee when the matter was called for hearing. However, an adjournment petition is filed by ld AR of the assessee to adjourn the case to some other date. Since, the appeals can be decided in the absence of ld AR, we proceed to dispose the same after hearing ld CIT DR qua the appellant-assessee.

3.

We have heard ld CIT DR and perused the material available on record. A perusal of the impugned orders clearly shows that as there was no response to the notices to substantiate the claim with documentary evidences and submissions, ld CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the AO. Before us also, there was no appearance from the side of the assessee. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) in order to meet the principle of natural justice, and remit the matter back to the file of the ld CIT(A) 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 proceedings before the ld CIT(A), failing which the ld CIT(A) 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

1.

by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes P a g e 2 | 3 & 215/CTK/2025 Assessment Year : 2014

15. Assessment year: 2015-16

6.

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes.

Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 2/7/2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →