What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT held that the CIT(A)'s ex-parte dismissal without deciding on merits was not in accordance with law. Therefore, the case was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

The assessee did not appear before the CIT(A), leading to an ex-parte order dismissing their appeal. The ITAT noted that the CIT(A) did not decide the case on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether an ex-parte dismissal by the CIT(A) without adjudicating on merits is legally sustainable, and the principles of natural justice.

M/S Urmindra Vincom Pvt. Ltd. vs I.T.O., Ward-6(4) | ITAT Kolkata 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’ble & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’ble]

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA [Before Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’ble Accountant Member & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’ble Judicial Member] Assessment Year: 2013-14 Urmindra Vincom (P) Ltd…………………...................……....………………..………………....……Appellant C/o. M/s Salarpuria Jajodia & Co. 7, Chittarnajan Avenue Kolkata – 700 072 [PAN: AAACU 4112 A] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(4), Kolkata.....……………………….…...........….....….…......Respondent Appearances by: None, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Dhrubajyoti Ray, JCIT, Sr. D/R, appearing on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing : October 31st, 2019 Date of pronouncing the order : October 31st, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, AM :-

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 2, Kolkata, (hereinafter the “ld.CIT(A)”), passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’), dt. 02/08/2017, for the Assessment Year 2013-14.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite issue of notice by RPAD. There is no application for adjournment either. Under these circumstances, we dispose off the case ex-parte on merits qua the assessee after hearing the ld. Departmental Representative.

At the outset, after perusing the order passed by the ld. CIT(A), we find that the assessee has not appeared before the ld. CIT(A) and hence an ex-parte order was passed dismissing the appeal of the assessee. We find that the ld. CIT(A) has not disposed off the case on merits. This is not in accordance with law. Hence, we deem it fit to restore the issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A), for fresh adjudication, in accordance with law, after giving the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, on the grounds of natural justice.

Assessment Year: 2013-14 Urmindra Vincom (P) Ltd 4. In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the Kolkata, the 31st day of October, 2019. Sd/- Sd/- [Aby T. Varkey] [J. Sudhakar Reddy] J. Sudhakar Reddy] Judicial Member Accountant Member Accountant Member Dated : 31.10.2019 {SC SPS} Copy of the order forwarded to: opy of the order forwarded to:

1. 1. Urmindra Vincom (P) Ltd B-2/2, 2nd Floor Gillander House 8, N.S. Road Kolkata 2. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(4), Kolkata 6(4), Kolkata 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata.

5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata.

M/S URMINDRA VINCOM PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-6(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