What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the principles of natural justice were violated as the AO passed an ex parte order. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 143 days, which was condoned by the Tribunal. The Assessing Officer (AO) had passed an ex parte order without adjudicating the matter on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex parte order passed by the AO violated the principles of natural justice, necessitating a fresh adjudication.

Ashok Kumar Bhutoria vs ITO | ITAT Kolkata 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BENCH ‘SMC’ KOLKATA

Before: Hon’ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, AM]

This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax-(A)-2, Kolkata dated 17.08.2017 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act ‘) relating to A.Y. 2012-13.

There is a delay of 143 days in filing of this appeal. After perusing the application filed for condonation of delay, along with evidences, I am convinced that the assessee had reasonable cause and could not file the appeal within the period of limitation. Hence I condone the delay and admit the appeal.

After hearing rival contentions, I find that the AO has passed an ex parte order. He has not adjudicated the matter on merits. The assessee has demonstrated before me that there was violation of principles of natural justice. Hence I restore the appeal to the file of CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law on the ground of natural justice.

Ashok Kumar Bhutoria A.Y.2012-13 2

In the result this appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the Court on 05.09.2018.

ASHOK KUMAR BHUTORIA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 40(3), 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