What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had passed ex-parte orders without adjudicating on merits, which is not in accordance with the law. Therefore, the appeals were restored to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

The assessee did not appear before the CIT(A) for assessment years 2012-13 and 2013-14, leading to ex-parte orders. The assessee also did not appear before the ITAT, but their counsel sought an adjournment which was rejected.

What were the issues?

Whether ex-parte orders passed by the CIT(A) without disposing of the appeals on merits are valid. Whether the ITAT should grant an adjournment when the assessee fails to appear.

Subrata Bhattacharjee vs ITO | ITAT Kolkata 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’ble]

Appearances by: None, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Dhrubojyoti Ray, JCIT, Sr. D/R, appearing on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing : November 4th, 2019 Date of pronouncing the order : November 27th, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, AM :-

Both these appeals filed by the assessee are directed against separate orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 09, Kolkata, (hereinafter the “ld.CIT(A)”), passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’), dt. 27/03/2019, for the Assessment Year 2012-13 and dt. 28/03/2019 for the Assessment Year 2013-14.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has filed an application seeking adjournment. The same is rejected as, in our view, this is not a fit case for grant of adjournment. Under these circumstances, we dispose off the case ex-parte qua the assessee after hearing the ld. Departmental Representative.

On perusing the orders passed by the ld. CIT(A), we find that the assessee has not appeared before the ld. CIT(A) and hence ex-parte orders were passed dismissing the appeals of the assessee. We find that the ld. CIT(A) has not disposed off the cases on merits. This is not in accordance with law. Hence, we deem it fit to restore the issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A), for fresh adjudication, in accordance

2 & 1360/Kol/2019 I.T.A. No.1359 & 1360/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2012 Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Subrata Bhattacharjee with law, after giving the assessee adequate opportunity of with law, after giving the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, on the being heard, on the grounds of natural justice. 4. In the result, both these both these appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical allowed for statistical purposes.

Kolkata, the Kolkata, the 27th day of November, 2019. Sd/- [J. Sudhakar Reddy] Accountant Member Dated : 27.11.2019 {SC SPS} Copy of the order forwarded to: opy of the order forwarded to:

1. 1. Subrata Bhattacharjee C/o. Gaurav Mathur, Advocate C/o. Gaurav Mathur, Advocate 1B, Nando Mallick Lane Jhunjhunwala House Kolkata – 700 006 2. Income Tax Officer, Ward-33(4), 33(4), Kolkata 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , Sent through e-mail.

5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata.

SUBRATA BHATTACHARJEE,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-33(4), KOLKATA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments