Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for assessment year 2018-19, which was based on an assessment order under section 147 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee's counsel argued that the Ld. CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without considering the submitted documents and evidences, violating the principle of natural justice.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee had submitted reply/submissions with supporting material during the appellate proceedings, but the Ld. CIT(A) had not considered them. This led to the case not being adjudicated on merits, thus violating the principle of natural justice.
Key Issues
Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred by passing an ex-parte order without considering the assessee's submissions and evidence, thereby violating the principle of natural justice.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT
Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI & SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA
Assessment Year: 2018-19 Pravinbhai Karshanbhahi Rathod ITO, Ward-1 बनाम Sheradi, Manavadar Junagadh. Dist. Junagadh 362 640 Vs. PAN : BLJPR 6218 J (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : (��यथ�/Respondent) �नधा�रती क� ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Mehul Ranpura, ld.AR राज�व क� ओर से/Revenue by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh, Sr-DR सुनवाई क� तार�ख /Date of Hearing : 27/01/2025 घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of Pronouncement : 28/02/2025 ORDER PER DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year (AY) 2018-19, is directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi[in short ‘Ld.CIT(A)/NFAC’], under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), dated 27.09.2024, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, ( hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), vide order dated 20.3.2024.
Shri Pravinbhai Karshanbhai Rathod (AY : 2018-19) 2 2.At the outset, the ld.Counsel for the assessee, begins by pointing out that during the appellate proceedings, the assessee submitted all documents and evidences, before the ld. CIT(A), as and when asked by the ld. CIT(A), however, the ld. CIT(A) might not have accessed or may not have seen the documents and evidences submitted by the assessee and therefore without considering the documents and evidences of the assessee, the ld. CIT(A) has passed the ex-parte order, which is against the principle of natural justice. Even then, the ld.CIT(A) did not consider the submissions of the assessee. Therefore, the ld.Counsel for the assessee contended that the matter may be remitted back to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
3.On the other hand, the ld.DR did not have any objection, if the matter is restored back to the file of the ld.CIT(A), for fresh adjudication.
We have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld CIT(A) and other materials brought on record. It is clear from the records that assessee has submitted reply/submissions along with supporting material during the appellate proceedings, however, the ld.CIT(A) has not considered the same hence the assessee`s case has not been adjudicated on merits and on the bases of the material available on record. Therefore, it is violation of principle of natural justice. We, therefore, restore this lis back to the CIT(A) for afresh adjudication on merits after affording sufficient opportunities to the assessee for presenting its case as per law.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 28 /02/2025