PANKAJ JIVRAJ VAVIYA,NAVI MUMBAI vs. PR CIT 28, NAVI MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3720/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 October 2018AY 2010-114 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee was out of town during the hearing and an adjournment request was denied. Therefore, the ex-parte order was set aside in the interest of justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed by the Principal CIT under Section 263. The assessee contended that the order was passed ex-parte without providing an opportunity to be heard.

What were the issues?

Whether the Principal CIT erred in passing an ex-parte order without affording the assessee a proper opportunity of being heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C”, BENCH MUMBAI

Before: SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM Shri Pankaj Jivraj Vaviya

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi
For Respondent: Shri H.N. Singh
Hearing: 03/10/2018Pronounced: 10/10/2018

Assessee by Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi Revenue by Shri H.N. Singh Date of Hearing 03/10/2018 Date of Pronouncement 10/10/2018 आदेश / O R D E R PER R.C.SHARMA (A.M): This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of Pr. CIT- 28, Mumbai dated 29/03/2017 for A.Y.2010-11 in the matter of order passed u/s.263 of the IT Act.

2.

At the outset, it was submitted by learned AR that exparty order has been passed by CIT without giving opportunity of being heard. In support of the contention that assessee was out of town during the period, case was fixed for hearing and adjournment for 2 days was sought for, but the CIT has passed the order without adjourning the case for two days, the assessee has Shri Pankaj Jivraj Vaviya filed an affidavit in support of its contention which reads as under:-

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →