What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee had sufficient cause for not appearing before the lower authorities. Therefore, on the grounds of natural justice, the matter was restored to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication.

The assessee did not appear before the Assessing Officer (AO) and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)), leading to ex parte orders being passed by both authorities. The assessee claimed to have been prevented by sufficient cause for these non-appearances.

What were the issues?

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

Sri Satyajit Ghosh vs ITO | ITAT Kolkata 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH : KOLKATA

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

Hearing: 02.06.2018Pronounced: 27.06.2018

This appeal by the Assessee arises out of the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Kolkata [ in short the ld CITA] dated 03.10.2016 against the order passed by the I.T.O, Ward-40(4), Kolkata [ in short the ld AO] under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) dated 30.12.2010 for the Assessment Year 2008-09.

After hearing rival contentions, I find that the ld. First Appellate Authority has passed an ex parte order.

The AO has also passed an ex parte order. The assessee has convinced me that he was prevented by sufficient cause for not appearing before the AO as well as before Ld. CIT(A).

Shri Satyajit Ghosh A.Yr.2008-09 4. Thus, on the ground of natural justice I restore this matter to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication in accordance with law.

The assessee shall appear within one month of receipts of this order before the ld. AO, take notice and thereafter co-operate with the AO in disposing off the case.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Court on 27.06.2018

SRI SATYAJIT GHOSH,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD -54(4) KOL., 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