What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee did not have an adequate opportunity to substantiate their claim before the CIT(A). Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex parte. The assessee claimed they did not receive a proper opportunity to be heard due to illness of their AR and repeated adjournment requests being denied.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in passing an ex parte order without providing the assessee with adequate opportunity of hearing.

Sutanutti Construction Pvt. Ltd vs ITO | ITAT Kolkata 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH: KOLKATA

Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

ORDER Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, JM:

This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), 2, Kolkata dt. 17-12-2015 for the A.Y 2009-10.

The only issue to be decided as to whether the CIT-A ex parte is justified in confirming the order of the AO by making addition in the facts and circumstances of the case.

At the time of hearing before us the ld.AR of the assessee submits that the CIT-A dismissed the appeal of assessee ex parte. Further, he submits that the assessee appeared before the CIT-A in response to notices issued u/s. 250 of the Act by the CIT-A and filed an application seeking adjournment stating that the AR was suffering from illness. Accordingly, the hearing was adjourned to 03-12-2015 on which date also the assessee appeared and sought adjournment and, the case was adjourned to 18-12-2015. But, however, the CIT-A passed ex parte order on 17-12-2018. The assessee did not have any proper opportunity to substantiate the claim and prayed to remand the matter to the file of CIT-A.

On the other hand, the ld. DR submits that the assessee was given sufficient opportunity, but without prosecuting its case nor filing any written submissions the assessee kept on filing adjournment application. Thereby, the CIT-A rightly dismissed the grounds of appeal by ex parte.

Heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is noticed that the assessee questioned the order of AO passed u/s. 143(3)/147 of the Act before the CIT-A contending that the said proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act was bad in law in the facts and circumstances of the case. Before the CIT-A there was no representation or explanation on behalf of the assessee regarding the claim of the assessee and the grounds of appeal raised before him. There was no adequate opportunity of hearing to assessee to substantiate its claim properly. Therefore, taking into consideration the submissions of the assessee, facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of natural justice, we deem it fit and proper to remand the matter to the file of the CIT-A to decide the issue in hand afresh by giving the assessee adequate opportunity of hearing. The assessee is also directed not to seek any adjournment. The assessee shall be at liberty to file requisite evidences and explanation in support of his contention and claim.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 02-02-2018 Sd/- Sd/- Waseem Ahmed S.S. Viswanethra Ravi Accountant Member Judicial Member

Dated : 02-02-2018

SUTANUTTI CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-8(4), KOLKATA, 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