What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee had sufficient cause for non-appearance before the CIT(A) and that the CIT(A) had not decided the case on merits. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex parte. The assessee claimed to have been prevented by sufficient cause for non-appearance. The CIT(A) did not dispose of the case on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex parte order passed by the CIT(A) was justified, and whether the principles of natural justice were followed.

Suvra Shankar Chakraborty vs ITO | ITAT Kolkata 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BENCH ‘SMC’ KOLKATA

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

ORDER

PER J.SUDHAKAR REDDY, AM:

This is an appeal by the assessee directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax-(A)-4, Kolkata relating to A.Y. 2011-12.

I find that the ld. CIT(A) had passed an ex parte order. The assessee has convinced me that he was prevented by sufficient cause for non appearance before the ld. CIT(A) on the dates of hearing. I also find that the ld. CIT(A) has not disposed of the case on merits. Hence I set aside the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law on the principles of natural justice. The assessee shall appear before the ld. CIT(A) within one month of the receipt of this order and take notice and thereby cooperate in disposing of the appeal. 3. In the result the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the Court on 21.03.2018.

[ J.Sudhakar Reddy ] Accountant Member Dated : 21.03.2018. [RG Sr.PS]

SUVRA SHANKAR CHAKRABORTY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 10(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments