What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order. Considering the assessee's undertaking to cooperate, the Tribunal remitted the issues back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

The assessee appealed to the ITAT against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A). The assessee argued that the CIT(A) did not provide adequate opportunity for being heard.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred by passing an ex-parte order without providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Smt. Panpori Jain, Panipat vs ITO | ITAT Delhi 2017

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C+SMC’ : NEW DELHI

ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM Assessee has filed this appeal against the impugned order dated 22.12.2016 passed by Ld. CIT(A) by claiming the relief that the impugned order may please be annulled and the Ld. CIT(A) may please be directed to pass a fresh order u/s. 250(6) in respect of all the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee before him after providing the assessee an opportunity of being heard.

Facts narrated by the revenue authorities are not disputed by both the parties, hence, the same are not repeated here for the sake of convenience.

At the time of hearing, Ld. Counsel for the assessee has drawn my attention towards the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) dated 22.12.2016 and stated that Ld. CIT(A) has passed the exparte impugned order against the assessee without giving adequate opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, he requested that the issues in dispute may be set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with the directions to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

He undertakes that if this Bench set aside the issues in dispute to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, the assessee will fully cooperate with the Ld. CIT(A) in the proceedings and will not take any unnecessary adjournment.

On the contrary, Ld. DR has not raised any serious objection on the request of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee and stated that Ld. CIT(A) has sufficient opportunity to the assessee, but she could not avail the same.

She also relied upon the orders of the authorities below.

We have heard both the parties and perused the records especially the impugned order passed by the Ld. First Appellate Authority. We find that the assessee remain non-cooperative before the Ld. CIT(A).

However, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee undertakes that assessee will appear before the Ld. CIT(A) and cooperate in the proceedings and not sought any unnecessary adjournment, if this Bench set aside the issues in dispute to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. We note that Ld. CIT(A) vide his impugned order dated 22.12.2016 has decided the appeal of the assessee exparte. Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, the issues in dispute are remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on this 22nd day of October, 2019.

SMT. PANPORI JAIN,PANIPAT vs. ITO, PANIPAT

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