Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for AY 2017-18 was against the CIT(A)'s order which upheld an assessment order passed by the AO u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B. The assessee argued that the CIT(A) order was ex-parte due to non-service of notices, violating natural justice.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) order was ex-parte and non-speaking. The assessee was not given sufficient opportunity to be heard, violating the principle of natural justice. Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) violated the principles of natural justice and if a fresh opportunity should be granted to the assessee.
Sections Cited
147, 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT
Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI & SHRI T. R. SENTHIL KUMAR
Appellant by : Shri Rajendra Singhal, Ld. A.R. Respondent by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 15/01/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 23/01/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2017-18, is directed against the order passed by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), vide order dated 30/11/2023, which in turn arises, out of an assessment order passed by Assessing Officer, u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 31/03/2022.
At the outset itself, the ld. Counsel for the assessee assailed the impugned order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and the order being an ex-parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of principle of natural justice. The Ld. Counsel explained the Bench that during the appellant proceedings, before the Ld. CIT(A), the notices of hearings, were not served, on the assessee, and as a result, the assessee could Page | 1 JJ Solar limited Vs. DCIT Circle-1(1), Rajkot (A.Y. 2017-18) ITA-48/RJT/2024 not appear and could not file the relevant documents and evidences in respect of various issues raised in the grounds of appeal. The Ld. CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order without adjudicating the issues, based on the documents and evidences. Therefore, the ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that in the interest of justice, another opportunity to contest the appeal before the Ld. first appellate authority may be granted to the assessee.
The ld. DR for the Revenue debarred from objecting the stand of the ld. Counsel.
We have heard both the parties. We note that in the assessee’s case under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s 147 r.w.s 144B of the Act and the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex parte order and non- speaking order, therefore, we do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee. Considering the above facts, we note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A). We note that the ld. CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits based on the material available before him hence it is a violation of principle of natural justice. 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 Ld. CIT(A) 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 ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed.
JJ Solar limited Vs. DCIT Circle-1(1), Rajkot (A.Y. 2017-18) ITA-48/RJT/2024
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 23/01/2025