UNITED FORTUNE INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 15(3)(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1682/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 March 2019AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee should have been given another opportunity to present their case. The assessee was also directed to cooperate fully in the proceedings before the CIT(A).

What were the facts?

The assessee filed two appeals before the ITAT against ex-parte orders passed by the CIT(A) for AYs 2012-13 and 2013-14. The assessee contended that they were not given sufficient opportunity to be heard by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing ex-parte orders without providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HONBLE & SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, HONBLE

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhunjunwalla
For Respondent: Shri D.G. Pansari
Hearing: 20.03.2019Pronounced: 29.03.2019

2 & 1682/MUM/2018 M/s. United Fortune International Pvt. Ltd., O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. These two appeals are filed by the assessee against different orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–24, Mumbai [hereinafter in short “Ld.CIT(A)”] dated 12.12.2017 for the A.Ys. 2012-13 and 2013-14.

2.

At the outset, Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that, the Ld.CIT(A) passed exparte order without giving sufficient opportunity to the assessee. He prayed that the appeals may be restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for adjudication after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

3.

Ld. DR left the decision to the discretion of the Bench.

4.

On hearing both the sides and on perusal of the order of the Ld.CIT(A), we find that one more opportunity should have been given to the assessee to prosecute the appeals. We have also observed that the assessee should have cooperated in the proceedings before the Ld.CIT(A) without remaining absent and attended the proceedings. Thus, the assessee is now directed to cooperate with the proceedings before the Ld.CIT(A) without fail. With these observations these two appeals are restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication after providing

5.

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on the 29th March, 2019

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →