M/S. ARJAN METAL (RENAMED AS M/S. TIRUPATI TRADERS),ROURKELA vs. ITO, WARD - 46(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1680/KOL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 December 2018AY 2013-142 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee had a sufficient cause for not appearing before the CIT(A) due to a notice sent to the wrong address. Therefore, the case was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was decided ex-parte by the CIT(A) because the assessee failed to appear. The assessee claimed they did not receive the notice as it was sent to an old address, despite providing the new address in the appeal form.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order passed ex-parte is valid when the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing due to a notice sent to an incorrect address.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy]

Date of concluding the hearing : November 26th, 2018 Date of pronouncing the order : December 5th, 2018 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy :-

This appeal filed by the assesse is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 14, Kolkata, (hereinafter the ‘ld. CIT (A)’), passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’), dt. 21/05/2018, for the Assessment Year 2013-14.

2.

Heard rival contentions. After perusing the order passed by the ld. CIT(A), we find that neither the assessee nor any authorized representative has appeared before the ld. CIT(A) and hence an ex-parte order was passed. The assessee demonstrated before me that he was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing before the ld. CIT(A), as the notice of hearing was sent to the old address, though in Form No. 36, the new address of the assessee has been furnished. Affidavit to that extent has been filed. Under these circumstances, as the ld. CIT(A) has not disposed off the case on merits, we deem it fit to restore the issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A), for fresh adjudication, in accordance with law, after giving the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, on the grounds of natural justice. The assessee is directed to appear before the ld. CIT(A) within one month of receipt of Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Arjan Metal (Renamed as M/s. Tirupati Traders) this order, either by himself or through his Authorised Representative, take notice and thereafter continue to co-operate till the disposal of the appeal. 3. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →