What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing before the CIT(A). Therefore, the case was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, ensuring natural justice.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte as neither the assessee nor their representative appeared. The assessee claimed they had filed an adjournment application which was not considered.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) was justified, and if the assessee had sufficient cause for non-appearance.

M/S. Vikas Kumar (HUF) vs ITO | ITAT Kolkata 2018

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

Before: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy

Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s. Vikas Kumar (HUF)….…………………....…………..……………...……..….…….........Appellant 4, Clyde Row Flat No. 102 Ramniwas Buildings Hastings Kolkata – 700 022 [PAN : ACTPJ 8260 C] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-40(4), Kolkata….…………………………….……............Respondent Appearances by: Shri Arvind Agarwal, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Sankar Halder, Addl. CIT, Sr. D/R. appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : October 9th , 2018 Date of pronouncing the order : November 9th , 2018 ORDER Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, AM :-

This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–12, Kolkata (hereinafter the ‘Ld. CIT(A)’), passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’), dt. 01/03/2018, relating to Assessment Year 2014-15.

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 it had filed an application for adjournment on the date of hearing i.e. 17th November, 2017. After perusing the same, I am of the considered opinion that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing before the ld. CIT(A). 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

Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s. Vikas Kumar (HUF) 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 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.

Kolkata, the 9th day of November, 2018.

M/S. VIKAS KUMAR (HUF),KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 40(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments