What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT held that the CIT(A) violated the principles of natural justice by not properly adjudicating the appeal on merits and not providing a sufficient opportunity to be heard. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

The assessee's appeal for AY 2013-14 was dismissed ex parte by the CIT(A) without a detailed discussion of the merits or the assessee's submissions. The ITAT noted that the CIT(A) relied solely on the Assessing Officer's order.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated the appeal on merits and followed the principles of natural justice. Whether the assessee was given a sufficient opportunity to present its case.

Eastern Agro Foods Private Ltd. vs DCIT | ITAT Kolkata 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B”, BENCH KOLKATA

Before: SHRI S.S.GODARA, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM

For Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT

Hearing: 31/10/2019Pronounced: 22/11/2019

आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench:

The captioned appeal filed by the assessee , pertaining to assessment year 2013-14, is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-2, Kolkata in appeal no. 11253/CIT(A)-2/16-17, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the “Act”) dated 14/03/2016.

At the time of hearing none appeared on behalf of assessee in spite of issuance of notice for hearing more than one occasion and Ld. Departmental Representative(DR), was present for the appellant Revenue. In the absence of any appearance by the assessee, the appeal is being disposed of ex parte qua the Eastern Agro Foods Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year:2013-14 assessee, after hearing Ld. DR for the Revenue on merits in terms of Rule 24 of the Income Tax Appellate, Tribunal, Rules, 1963.

The ld. CIT(A) has given the findings which is reproduced below:

“I have considered the grounds of appeal, statement of facts and submission of the authorized representative of the appellate company as well as the assessment order framed in the light of the materials available on record before the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer has already discussed the issue in details while passing the order in the matter. The appellate has admitted that he is only contract manufacturer so there is no reason to claim sales discount. Keeping in view of the facts as mentioned above, in the absence of any cogent material evidence, I do not find any infirmity in the order of the Assessing Officer and the same is hereby upheld. In view of the above, these grounds of appeal are dismissed.”

4. We heard the ld. D.R. for the revenue and perused the material available on record. We note that it is crystal clear that the ld. CIT(A) has not considered the assessment records and as well as assessment order to adjudicate the issue. We also note that the ld. CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits based on the material available before him, he only stated in his order that “Assessing Officer has already discussed the issue in detail”, hence it is a violation of principle of natural justice. Ld. CIT(A) did not discuss the submission filed by the A.R. of the assessee. We note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the effected 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 allowed.

Eastern Agro Foods Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year:2013-14

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Court on 22.11.2019

EASTERN AGRO FOODS PRIVATE LTD.,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T.,CIRCLE-5(2), 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