M/S ANMOL NIRYAT PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-12(4), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 673/KOL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 November 2019AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT held that the CIT(A)'s order was vitiated due to a violation of the principle of natural justice as the issues were not adjudicated on merits. The matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals for AY 2010-11 and 2011-12 were dismissed ex parte by the CIT(A) as the assessee did not appear. The assessee also failed to appear before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order was valid when passed ex parte without adjudicating on merits, violating the principle of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147

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 two appeals filed by the assessee , pertaining to assessment years 2010-11 & 2011-12 respectively, are directed against the separate orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-24, Kolkata, which in turn arise out of separate assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144 / 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the “Act”) dated 22.12.2017.

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 appeals are 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 Anmol Niryat (P) Ltd. Assessment Years:2010-11 & 2011-12

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, as the ld. First appellate authority did not adjudicate issue on merits.

4. We note that the ld. CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits based on the assessment records and material available before him hence it is a violation of principle of natural justice. We are of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before ld. CIT(A). The ld. D.R. for the revenue did not object if the matter is remitted back to the file of 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, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

4.

In the result, the both these appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Court on 13.11.2019

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →