What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A)'s order was vitiated due to a violation of natural justice as it was passed ex-parte without considering the assessment records. Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication.

The assessee's appeals were filed against orders of the CIT(A) which arose from an assessment order. The assessee did not appear before the CIT(A) and the order was passed ex-parte, violating principles of natural justice.

What were the 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.

M/S Top Point Lea Ther vs I.T.O., Ward-33(4) | 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: 13/11/2019

आदेश / O R D E R

Per Bench:

The captioned two appeals filed by the assessee , pertaining to assessment year 2013-14, are directed against the separate orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-9, Kolkata, which in turn arise out of common assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the ‘Act’) dated 21.11.2016.

Top Point Leather &222/Kol/2019 Assessment Year:2013-14 2. 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 assessee, after hearing Ld. DR for the Revenue on merits in terms of Rule 24 of the Income Tax Appellate, Tribunal, Rules, 1963.

At the outset itself, we note 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 assessee, in grounds of appeal filed before us, contended that order of ld. CIT(A) rejecting petition u/s 154(1A) is not based on latter and spirit of rectification provision provided in the Income Tax Act. We are of the view that in the interest of justice, another opportunity to contest the appeal before the Ld. first appellate authority may be granted to the assessee.

We note that the ld. CIT(A) did not consider the assessment records and did not pass order on merits based on the documents available before him hence it is a violation of principle of natural justice. Hence we are of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before ld. CIT(A). 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, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed.

Top Point Leather &222/Kol/2019 Assessment Year:2013-14 4. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Court on 13.11.2019

M/S TOP POINT LEA THER,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,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