KAVITA,MUZAFFARNAGAR vs. ITO, MUZAFFARNAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5483/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 May 2017AY 2009-103 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessment order and the CIT(A)'s order were passed ex-parte. Citing principles of natural justice, the Tribunal set aside the issue to the AO for fresh adjudication after providing a reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against an ex-parte assessment order and the CIT(A)'s confirmation of it. The assessee contended that proper notices were not served, and thus no reasonable opportunity of being heard was provided.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessment and appellate orders were passed without affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee due to improper service of notices.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 148,Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. N. K. Saini

Hearing: 15.05.2017Pronounced: 17.05.2017

ORDER This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 24.08.2016 of ld. CIT(A), Muzaffarnagar.

2.

Following grounds have been raised in this appeal: “1.1 That the Ld. AO has erred in law and on facts in making assessment u/s 144 /148, without effecting proper service of notice u/s 148 or 142 (1) as stated in ex-parte order passed by the A.O. 1.2 That the Ld. CIT (Appeal) has erred in confirming AO's order u/s 144/148 of the Act. 2.1 That the AO has erred in making an addition of Rs.847165/- on account of unexplained deposits in the Bank account u/s 69A of the Act. 2.2 That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 847165/-made by the A.O.

1.

2 Kavita ignoring the agrl. Background of the appellant and family members earning agriculture income and enjoying sale proceeds of popular trees grown over the lands.

3.

THAT the Ld. CIT(A) was wrongly influenced of the adverse observations contained in AO's ex-parte order passed without effecting proper services of the various notices issues and not properly served upon the appellant, resulting in addition of Rs.847165/- towards appellant's income which is a great hit, unjust and deserve to be knocked out.

4.

THAT the appellant reserves its rights to add, amend or modify any ground of appeal

before final adjudication.”

3. Vide Ground No. 3, the assessee is aggrieved against the action of the AO in passing the assessment order ex-parte and vide Ground No. 1.2, the assessee is aggrieved against the action of the ld. CIT(A) in confirming the order passed by the AO ex-parte.

4. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(A) passed the impugned order ex-parte without affording a due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and the AO also did not afford proper opportunity of being heard while framing the assessment ex-parte. He requested that the matter may be sent back to the AO for adjudication after providing a due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

5.

In his rival submissions the ld. DR submitted that the assessee did not cooperate and never appeared either before the AO or the ld. 3 Kavita CIT(A). Therefore, there was no option except to pass the assessment or the impugned order ex-parte.

6.

I have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the material available on the record. In the present case, it is an admitted fact that the AO passed the assessment order ex-parte u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the ld. CIT(A) also passed the impugned order ex-parte. He simply stated that the notices of hearing were issued on 15.06.2016 and 12.08.2016 and there was no compliance, however, he nowhere stated that the notices of hearing were served upon the assessee. I, therefore, keeping in view the principles of natural justice, deem it appropriate to set aside this issue back to the file of the AO to be adjudicated afresh in accordance with law after providing a due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

7.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. (Order Pronounced in the Court on 17/05/2017)

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →