RAJIB KUMAR SOM,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 23, KOLKATA

ITA 1970/KOL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 March 2019AY 2011-122 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A)'s order was non-speaking and lacked proper adjudication, violating Section 250(6) of the Act. Therefore, the case was remanded for fresh adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of nine days, which was condoned. The CIT(A) had passed an ex parte order against the assessee for non-prosecution and on merits without proper adjudication.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order passed ex parte without proper adjudication and adherence to statutory requirements is valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “SMC” KOLKATA

Before: Shri S.S, Godara

O R D E R This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2011-12, arises against the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-19, Kolkata’s order dated 27.12.2017 passed in case No.368/CIT(A)-19/Kol/14-15, involving proceedings u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’. Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

It emerges at the outset that this assessee’s instant appeal suffers from nine days’ delay in filing. It has placed on record its condonation petition attributing reasons thereof to various factors for example compilation of necessary record within the limitation prescribed. Mr. Singh is fair enough in not disputing all these condonation averments. I therefore conclude that the assessee’s above stated delay in filing of the appeal of nine days’ is neither intentional nor deliberate. The same stand condone accordingly.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →