MR.AZEEZULLA,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-6(2)(2), BANGALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restored the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision. This was done in the interest of justice to allow the assessee to raise additional grounds.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte without providing adequate opportunity for the assessee to raise additional grounds. The CIT(A) passed the order on the day after the hearing was adjourned.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) provided adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee before passing the order. Whether the matter should be restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC-C” BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA
O R D E R
Per Shri A.K. Garodia, Accountant Member
This appeal is filed by the assessee which is directed against the order of ld. CIT (A) - 7, Bengaluru dated 17.10.2017 for Assessment Years 2012-13.
The assessee has raised as many as 7 grounds but in course of hearing, it was submitted by the learned AR of the assessee that the matter should be restored back to CIT (A) for a fresh decision because adequate opportunity of hearing was not provided by CIT (A). In support of this contention, my attention was drawn to Para 2 of the impugned order of CIT (A) and it was pointed out that in this Para, it is noted by CIT (A) that on request of the learned AR of the assessee for granting time to file additional grounds, time was allowed and the case was fixed on 16.10.2017. He submitted that admittedly, no one could appeal before CIT (A) on this date and he passed the impugned order on 17.10.2017. He conceded that this is a lapse on the part of the assessee but in the interest of justice, some more opportunity should have been provided by the CIT (A). He submitted that in the interest of justice, the matter may be restored to CIT (A) so that the assessee can raise additional grounds before CIT (A).
Learned DR of the revenue supported the order of CIT (A) but he did not raise serious objection against the request of the AR of the assessee to restore back the matter to CIT (A).
I have considered the rival submissions and gone through the order of CIT (A). I feel that in the facts of the present case and in the interest of justice, the matter should be restored back to CIT (A) for fresh decision. Accordingly, I set aside the order of CIT (A) and restore the entire matter back to his file for a fresh decision after providing adequate opportunity to both sides. In view of this decision, no adjudication is called for on the merit and I do not make any comment on merit of the case.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Acc LTD. vs. Secy.Industries Deptt.Orissa · 16 Oct 2026
- Kumaran Transports (Tuticorin) Private Limited vs. The Assistant Commissioner Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- Venkadeswara Grill Works vs. The Joint Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- U Days Garments vs. The Adjudication OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026