Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed against an ex parte order by the CIT(A) for AY 2014-15, which arose from an assessment under section 147 r.w.s. 143(3). The assessee could not appear before the CIT(A) or submit necessary documents and sought remission to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
Held
The Tribunal noted the assessee's inability to plead their case and submit documents. Applying principles of natural justice, the Tribunal decided to give the assessee another opportunity, remitting the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a de novo adjudication on merits after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard.
Key Issues
Whether to grant the assessee a fresh opportunity to present their case and documents before the Assessing Officer, setting aside the ex parte order of the CIT(A).
Sections Cited
147, 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI & SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA
आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, AM:
Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15, is directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Rajkot [in short “the ld. CIT(A)”], National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short ‘the NFAC’), Delhi, dated 27.05.2024, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), vide order dated 26.05.2023.
ITA.464/Rjt/2024 AY.2014-15 Rau Ram Morbi v. ITO 2. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the order passed by the Assessing Officer is under section 147 of the Act. On appeal, before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee could not appears and could not submit the details and documents, therefore ld. CIT(A) has also passed the ex parte order. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee therefore contended that now the assessee is ready to submit details and documents before the lower authorities, therefore, the matter may be remitted back to the file of Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
On the other hand, learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the Revenue has not objected the request of the Ld. Counsel.
We have heard both the parties and perused material available on record. Considering the above facts, we note that assessee could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A). We also note that assessee did not submit entire documents and evidences before the Assessing Officer. Hence, we are of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before the Assessing Officer. We note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed.
ITA.464/Rjt/2024 AY.2014-15 Rau Ram Morbi v. ITO 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced on 27/02/2025 in the open court.