SRI DURGA PRASAD ROY,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-42, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 11/KOL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 February 2019AY 2010-20113 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte and non-speaking order without considering the assessment records or discussing the assessee's case on merits. Therefore, the order was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against an ex-parte and non-speaking order passed by the CIT(A). The assessee contended that they were not given a proper opportunity to represent their case before the CIT(A), violating the principles of natural justice.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) violated the principles of natural justice by not providing the assessee with a sufficient opportunity to be heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C”, BENCH KOLKATA

Before: SHRI S.S.GODARA, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM

For Appellant: Shri Manish Tiwari, FCA
For Respondent: Shri Robin Chowdhury, Addl. CIT DR
Hearing: 05/02/2019Pronounced: 08/02/2019

आदेश / O R D E R

Per Dr. A. L. Saini:

1.

The captioned appeal filed by the assessee , pertaining to assessment year 2010-11 is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-9, Kolkata, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act).

2.

At the outset itself, the ld. Counsel for the assessee assailed the impugned order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and the order being an ex-parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of principle of natural justice. The ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that in the Durga Prasad Roy Assessment Year:2010-11 interest of justice, another opportunity to contest the appeal before the Ld. first appellate authority may be granted to the assessee.

3.

We note that in the assessee’s case under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s 143(3) of the Act and the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex parte order and non-speaking order, therefore, we do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee.

4.

We note that the ld. CIT(A) did not consider the assessment records while adjudicating the issue. We note that the ld. CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits based on the material available before him hence it is a violation of principle of natural justice. We note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the effected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

5.

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

Order pronounced in the Court on 08.02.2019

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →