Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D”, BENCH KOLKATA
Before: SHRI S. S. GODARA, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM
आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: The captioned appeal filed by the Assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2012-13, is directed against an order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 23, Kolkata in appeal No.126/CIT(A)-23/W-5(3)/16-17 dated 09.03.2017, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) 23.03.2015.
The grievances raised by the assessee read as under:
“1. For that the order of the Ld. CIT (A) is arbitrary, illegal and bad in law. 2. For that the Ld. C.I.T(A) erred in deciding the appeal ex parte without allowing the appellant any proper and reasonable opportunity of being heard. 3. For that the order passed by the Ld. C.I.T(A) is bad in law since the Ld. C.I.T(A)has not decided the issues ground-wise in respect of the grounds raised by the appellant in the Memo of Appeal.
M/s. Brightstar Distributors Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year: 2012-13
For that the Ld. C.I.T(A) is bad in law since the order passed is not any speaking order nor the C.I.T(A) has looked into the assessment records and relevant materials to conclude that the order of the Ld. AO cannot be interfered with.
5. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the order passed by the Ld. C.I,.T(A) is not maintainable. 6. For that the order of the A.O be modified and the assessee be given relief prayed for. 7. For that the assessee craves leave to add, alter or amend any ground before or at the time of hearing.”
At the outset itself, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted before the Bench that impugned order is an ex parte order and the assessee could not plead his case before the Ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) fixed the hearings on various dates i.e. on 24.01.17, 16.02.17, 10.03.17 but notice of hearings were returned unserved and the assessee does not get the notices of hearing. The ld Counsel also submitted that ld. CIT(A) has not decided the case of the assessee ground-wise and did not consider the documents and evidences submitted to Assessing Officer, therefore, he prayed the Bench that the matter may be remanded back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The Ld. DR did not have any objection if the matter is remitted before the Ld. CIT(A).
4. We have heard learned arguments of both sides. We note that a perusal of the body of the impugned order, it is apparent that the order of ld. CIT(A) is an ex parte order which has been challenging by the assessee for want of proper opportunity. After considering the reasons given by the Counsel, we are satisfied that there was a reasonable cause for non-appearance before the ld. CIT(A). We also find that the ld. CIT(A) failed to dispose the matter of the assessee ground-wise and has not decided the appeal of the assessee considering the material submitted before the Assessing Officer. We note that the Assessing Officer framed the assessment u/s 144 of the Act and impugned order is an ex parte order, therefore, we do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee. In these circumstances, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and Page | 2
M/s. Brightstar Distributors Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year: 2012-13 remit the case back to the file of ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to pass a speaking order after hearing the assessee and giving adequate opportunity to assessee. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 06.06.2018.