TRIMETUS TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 3(1), CHENNAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's failure to appear but, in the interest of justice, remitted the matter back to the CIT(A) for a de-novo consideration with an opportunity for the assessee to be heard.
What were the facts?
The assessee's representative could not appear before the CIT(A) due to unavoidable circumstances, leading to an ex-parte order. The assessee requested the matter be remitted back to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing.
What were the issues?
Whether an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) without affording the assessee an opportunity to be heard should be set aside and the matter remitted for fresh consideration.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY & SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY
आदेश / O R D E R
Per A. Mohan Alankamony, AM:
The appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Chennai, dated 28.09.2018 in for the S.P. No.374/Chny/2018 assessment year 2014-15 passed U/s.250(6) r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act.
The assessee has also filed a stay petition in SP No.374 of 2018 seeking stay of the outstanding demand of Rs.7,86,01,390/- for the relevant assessment year.
At the outset the Ld.AR submitted that neither the assessee nor its representative could appear before the Ld.CIT(A) on the date of hearing due to unavoidable circumstances. The Ld.AR further submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) without giving another opportunity of being heard passed ex-parte order on merits. It was therefore pleaded that the matter may be remitted back to the file of Ld.CIT(A) for de-nova consideration. The Ld.AR further pleaded that he shall not pursue the stay application if the appeal of the assessee is remitted back to the file of Ld.CIT(A) for fresh consideration. The Ld.DR on the other hand vehemently opposed to the submission of the Ld.AR.
We have heard the rival submissions and carefully perused the materials on record. From the facts of the case it is apparent that the Ld.CIT(A) has passed an exparte order due to the failure on the part of the assessee and the Ld.AR to appear before him. This lethargic S.P. No.374/Chny/2018 attitude of the Ld.AR and the assessee is not appreciable. However, in the interest of justice, we hereby remit the matter back to the file of Ld.CIT(A) for de-nova consideration after giving the assessee due opportunity of being heard. We also direct the assessee and Ld.AR to promptly co-operate before the Ld.Revenue Authorities in order to expedite their proceedings, failing which they shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with merit and law based on the materials on record.
Since we have remitted the appeal back to the file of Ld.CIT(A) for de-nova consideration, we do not find it necessary to entertain the stay petition filed by the assessee.
In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the stay petition of the assessee is dismissed.
Order pronounced on the 04th December, 2018 at Chennai.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bangi Mines And Minerals vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Arka Business Solutions vs. Principal Commissioner Of CustomsTelangana · 30 Oct 2026