M/S HALLMARK COMMOTRADE PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD.8(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 82/KOL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 March 2018AY 2009-20102 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had disposed of the appeal after granting only one hearing opportunity. Therefore, to ensure justice and fair play, the case was set aside to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal arose from an ex parte order passed by the CIT(A). The CIT(A) had granted only one opportunity for hearing, which the assessee sought to adjourn.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) passed an ex parte order without providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH : KOLKATA

Before: Hon’ble Shri Aby. T. Varkey, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ]

Hearing: 13.03.2018Pronounced: 16.03.2018

ORDER Per M.Balaganesh, AM

1.

This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – 3, Kolkata (in short the ld CITA) in Appeal No. 10/CIT(A)-3/W-8(4)/2015-16 dated 22.11.2016 against the order passed by the ITO, Ward-8(4), Kolkata [ in short the ld AO] under section 147/143(3)/263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) dated 30.03.2015 for the Assessment Year 2009-10.

2.

The preliminary grounds raised by the assessee is that the Ld. CIT(A) had passed an ex parte order without hearing the assessee. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) had granted one opportunity of hearing on 09.11.2016. The assessee has filed an adjournment letter on 11.11.2016 acknowledging the receipt of hearing notice dated 31.10.2016 but it is not clear as to, on which date the assessee received the hearing notice from the Ld. CIT(A). However we find the Ld. CIT(A) had disposed off the case after granting only one opportunity to the assessee. In these facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it

2 M/s Hallmark Commotrade Private Limited A.Yr.2009-10 fit and appropriate is in the interest of justice and fair play to set aside this appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication of the issues on merits uninfluenced by his earlier order. The assessee is directed to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) on 31.05.2018. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has undertaken to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) on 31.05.2018. The assessee is also directed not to seek any adjournment before the Ld. CIT(A) except due to exceptional or bona fide circumstances and co-operate with the Ld. CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of this appeal by the Ld. CIT(A). With these directions, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

5.

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

Order pronounced in the Court on 16.03.2018

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →