INDRAPRASTH SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 9(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1494/KOL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 March 2019AY 2012-132 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) passed an ex parte order without a proper adjudication on merits, which is not in accordance with law. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was directed against an ex parte order passed by the CIT(A). The CIT(A) had fixed two dates for hearing but passed the order without disposing of the case on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated the appeal on merits after providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Date of concluding the hearing : February 28th , 2019 Date of pronouncing the order : March 27th ,2019

O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy :- This appeal by the assessee and is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 3, Kolkata (hereinafter the ‘ld. CIT (A)’), passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’), dated 03.03.2017.

2.

After hearing rival contentions, we find that the ld. CIT(A) has fixed dates of hearing on 14.02.2017 and the second date of hearing on 17.02.2017 and thereafter passed an ex parte order. He has not disposed of the case on merits. This is not in accordance with law. Hence, we set aside the issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law. The CIT(A) shall proceed to adjudicate the issue after giving the assessee, adequate opportunity of being heard.

3.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Kolkata, the 27th March, 2019.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →