SRI SRI ADHAR GUPTA,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WARD-33(3),KOLKATA, KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the assessee had sufficient cause for non-appearance before the CIT(A) due to the pending rectification application. The CIT(A) should have kept the appeal pending until the rectification application was disposed of.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte. The assessee had sought adjournment as a rectification application filed before the AO was pending. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without considering the pending rectification application.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte when a rectification application was pending before the AO. The issue revolves around the proper procedure when an assessee seeks adjournment due to a pending rectification.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH ‘C(SMC
Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap]
order : April 03, 2019 ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) – 9, Kolkata dated 30.11.2018 passed ex-parte whereby he dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
The assessee in the present is an individual who filed his return of income for the year under consideration on 31.03.2007 declaring a total income of Rs. 1,93,810/-. The assessment was originally completed by the AO on the same income vide an order dated 31.12.2008 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act. The said assessment however was subsequently reopened and in the reassessment made u/s 143(3)/147 vide an order dated 28.03.2013, the total income of the assessee was determined by the AO at Rs. 63,34,080/- after making addition of Rs. 61,40,262/- on account of long term capital gain and Rs. 8,815/- on account of short term capital gain.
Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Adhar Gupta
Against the order passed by the AO u/s 143(3)/147, an appeal was filed by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) which was partly allowed by the Ld. CIT(A) – 9, Kolkata vide an order dated 31.03.2006. The effect to the said order of the Ld. CIT(A) was given by the AO vide an order dated 11.05.2016 whereby he recomputed the total income of the assessee at Rs. 47,41,100/-. According to the assessee, there were certain mistakes in the order passed by the AO on 11.05.2016 giving effect the order of the Ld. CIT u/s 250 of the Act. He, therefore, made an application u/s 154 on 23rd May, 2016 seeking rectification of the said mistakes. He also filed on 10.06.2016 an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against the order of the AO dated 11.05.2016. When the said appeal was taken up for hearing by the Ld. CIT(A), adjournment was sought by the assessee on the ground that the application filed by him u/s 154 before the AO seeking rectification of the order of the AO dated 11.05.2016 was still pending. Keeping in view the non-appearance of the assessee during the course of appellate proceedings before him and the fact that application for rectification u/s 154 had already been filed by the assessee before the AO, the Ld. CIT(A) proceeded to dismiss the appeal of the assessee vide his appellate order dated 30.11.2018 passed ex- parte. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.
I have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. As rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the assessee, adjournments were sought by the assessee during the course of appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) as his application for rectification on the same issue was pending before the AO. There was thus a sufficient cause for the non-appearance
Assessment Year: 2006-07 Shri Adhar Gupta of the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A), in my opinion, should have kept the appeal of the assessee pending till the disposal of the application of the assessee for rectification by the AO on the same issues instead of dismissing the same ex-parte. I, therefore, set aside the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) ex-parte and remit the matter back to him with the direction to keep the same pending till the disposal of the assessee’s application for rectification u/s 154 by the AO. The AO is also directed to dispose of the said application expeditiously within a period of three months.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 3rd April, 2019.
More judgments on Section 154
- Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs Rakesh Kumar Malani, JaipurITA 1425/JPR/2026[2025-26]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2025-26
- Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs Anita Sharma, JaipurITA 1344/JPR/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Ramtirath Bawa, Nagpur vs ITO Ward3(4), NagpurITA 327/NAG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Mohinder Singh, Nagpur vs ITO Ward 3(4), NagpurITA 322/NAG/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Ramakrishna Reddy Makireddy, Hyderabad vs ACIT, Circle-5(1), HyderabadITA 70/HYD/2026[2007-08]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2007-08
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Maruti Nandan Minetech Private Limited vs. The Joint CommissionerRajasthan · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Rentex Polymers Private Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxDelhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Shila Traders vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Ashish Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner Gsto Ward No. 86Delhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bhanwal Trading And Company vs. The Union Of INDIARajasthan · 28 Oct 2026