M/S GOOD HEALTH HERBAL (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.WARD-6(4), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 621/KOL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 November 2019AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that the CIT(A)'s order violated the principles of natural justice by not providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee to present their case. Therefore, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex parte by the CIT(A) without considering the assessment records or discussing the case on merits. The assessee had sought adjournments on multiple occasions.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order violated the principles of natural justice by being passed ex parte without adequate opportunity to the assessee. Whether the CIT(A) properly considered the assessment records and merits of the case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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:

1.

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, 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 08/02/2016.

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.

M/s Good Health Herbal (P) Ltd. Assessment Year:2013-14 3. 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. 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 while adjudicating the issue and 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 assessee has participated in appellate proceedings and sought adjournment on three occasions. The ld. CIT(A) ought to have given more opportunity to the assessee to represent his case; during appellate proceedings. 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.

5.

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

Order pronounced in the Court on 13.11.2019

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →