M/S ROOPMAHAL COMMOSALE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 495/KOL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 July 2018AY 2012-132 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the cause shown by the assessee for not attending the hearing was reasonable. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside and the matter was restored to the CIT(A)'s file for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was heard ex parte by the CIT(A) because the assessee's AR was ill and could not attend the hearing. The assessee requested the ITAT to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restore the matter for fresh adjudication.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order passed ex parte and as a non-speaking order should be set aside due to reasonable cause for non-appearance of the assessee's AR.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH: KOLKATA

Before: Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM]

Hearing: 05.07.2018Pronounced: 11.07.2018

Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM

1.

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-2, Kolkata dated 06.12.2016 for AY 2012-13.

2.

At the time of hearing Ld. AR for the assessee drew our attention to the impugned order to the fact that the order was passed ex parte and also it is a non-speaking order. He submitted before the Bench that Ld. AR of the assessee was unable to attend before the Ld. CIT(A) on 28.11.2016 as the Ld. AR of the assessee fell ill. Hence, he urged before the bench to set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file for fresh adjudication. On the other hand, the Ld. DR relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(A).

3.

After hearing both the sides we note that the impugned order is an ex parte and non- speaking order. We also note that the cause shown by the Ld. AR of the assessee for not attending the hearing on 28.11.2016 before the Ld. CIT(A) as he was suffering fever. We note that the cause shown by the assessee is a reasonable cause for not attending before the Ld. CIT(A) on 28.11.2016 and hence, we are of the view that the matter should be restored

Roopmahal Commosale Pvt. Ltd., AY 2012-13 back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for adjudicating afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee as per law. We order accordingly.

4.

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

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →