RAJENDRA PRASAD,HAZARIBAGH vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, HAZARIBAGH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 138/RAN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi10 June 2025AY 2014-2015Bench: BEFORES/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had issued multiple notices of hearing, but the assessee failed to comply. However, in the interest of justice, the matters were restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. This restoration was subject to the assessee depositing Rs. 1,00,000/- per year to the Jharkhand Income Tax Bar Association within 60 days.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against the orders of the CIT(A), NFAC. The assessments were completed under section 147 read with section 144 of the Act. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeals without providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeals without providing adequate opportunity for hearing, and if so, whether the matter should be restored to the AO for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Khub Chand Pandya, Sr
Hearing: 10/06/202Pronounced: 10/06

O R D E R Per Bench

Both the appeal appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the orders of the ld CIT(A), ), NFAC, NFAC, Delhi Delhi dated dated 26.2.2024 in in Appeal Appeal No. No.NAFC/2013- 14/10148236 and NAFC/ and NAFC/2014-15/10148248for the assessment year or the assessment years 2014-15 & 2015-16, respectively. , respectively.

2.

Shri Khub Chand Pandya, ld Sr hri Khub Chand Pandya, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue and DR appeared for the revenue and ShriDeveshPoddar,ld AR appeared for the assessee. ld AR appeared for the assessee.

P a g e 1 | 3 & 139/RAN/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16

3.

It was submitted by ld AR that the assessments in this case were completed u/s.147 r.w.s 144 of the Act. It was also the submission that the ld CIT(A) NFAC has dismissed the appeals without giving reasonable opportunity to the assessee. He thus prayed that the matter be restored to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication and undertake in Bar that he will cooperate in the set aside proceedings before the AO.

4.

In reply, ld Sr DR vehemently supported the orders of lower authorities.

5.

We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the ld CIT(A) clearly shows that the ld CIT(A) has issued four notices of hearing i.e. on 10.6..2022, 5.8.2022, 724.8.2022 and 19.10.2022 but the assessee has failed to comply with the notices issued by the ld CIT(A). It is also noticed that the Assessing Officer has passed order u/s.147 r.w.s 144 of the Act due to non- representation by the assessee to substantiate the claim of the assessee. However, in the interest of justice, the issues in these appeals are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after allowing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assesseesubject to the cost of Rs.1,00,000/- per each year to be deposited to Jharkhand Income Tax Bar Association within 60 days from the passing of this order. In the event the cost is not paid and the receipt is not produced before the Assessing Officer, at the date of first hearing, the order of the ld CIT(A) shall stand confirmed.

P a g e 2 | 3 & 139/RAN/2024 Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2015-16

6.

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 10/06/2025.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →