Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed an ex-parte order from the CIT(A) for AY 2017-18, which dismissed the appeal without considering submitted documents. The assessee had made detailed submissions when the appeal was in physical mode, but due to its transfer to a faceless system, could not provide further evidence, believing prior submissions were already on record.
Held
The tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. The CIT(A) is directed to provide the assessee with a reasonable opportunity to make submissions in accordance with the law.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without providing a reasonable opportunity for the assessee to present submissions, especially after a change in appeal mode from physical to faceless.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”, DELHI
(A.Y.2017-18) Anu Dass, H2/20 Mahaveer Enclave, Palam Dabri Road, New Delhi 110045 ...... अपीलाथ�/Appellant PAN: AAHPD-1813-B बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, ..... �ितवादी/Respondent Ward 44(5),Delhi अपीलाथ� �ारा/ Appellant by : Ms. Anupma Aggarwal, Chartered Accountant �ितवादी�ारा/Respondent by : Shri Rajesh Tiwari, Sr. DR सुनवाई क� ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 10/12/2024 घोषणा क� ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : : 10/12/2024 आदेश/ORDER
PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against an ex-parte order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(A)') dated 19.03.2023, for assessment year 2017-18.
Both sides heard, order of the authorities below examined. This appeal by the assessee is against an ex-parte order of CIT(A). The short contention of the assessee is that the CIT(A) without considering documents furnished by the assessee has dismissed appeal of the assessee. The ld. AR submitted that the (AY 2017-18) assessee had furnished detailed submissions when appeal was initially taken up in physical mode. Subsequently, appeal was transferred to faceless appeal; the assessee had no knowledge regarding face less appeal and procedure, therefore, the assessee could not provide documentary evidence in faceless mode. However, the submissions already made were on record of CIT(A) but he failed to consider the same.
Taking into consideration facts of the case, I deem it appropriate to restore this appeal back to the CIT(A) for denovo adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law.
The assessee is directed to respond to notice(s) served by the CIT(A), without fail.