What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT held that the CIT(A) should not have dismissed the appeal on the ground of non-prosecution without deciding it on merits. Therefore, the matter was set aside to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) due to non-compliance. The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT with a delay, which was condoned. The ITAT noted that the CIT(A) had not adjudicated the appeal on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte on grounds of non-prosecution instead of adjudicating on merits.

Sri Dipak Goswami, Purba Medinipur vs ITO | ITAT Kolkata 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘D’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi]

Sri Dipak Goswami……..……….…...……….……………………………………………….…….……...Appellant Prop: M/s. Dias Enterprise Ristey Complex Flat No. G/2/A Mahaprabhu Chak Haldia Township Purba Mednipur – 721 607 [PAN : AFSPG 9898 P] Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Haldia………………………………..……………………..…. Respondent Presently: Income Tax Officer, Ward-27(1) Haldia - 721602 Appearances by: None, appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT, DR appearing on behalf of the Revenue. Date of concluding the hearing : December 19th, 2017 Date of pronouncing the order : January 5th , 2018 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy :-

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Kolkata, (hereinafter the ‘ld. CIT (A)’), passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’), dt. 29/02/2016, for the Assessment Year 2011-12.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite issual of notice by RPAD. Under these circumstances, we dispose off the case ex-parte, qua the assessee on merits, after hearing the ld. D/R.

Heard the ld. D/R. There is a delay of 59 days in filing of the appeal. The assessee filed a petition for condonation of delay supported by an affidavit. After perusing the same, we are of the considered opinion that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing this appeal in time. Hence we condone the delay and admit the appeal.

Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sri Dipak Goswami 4. We find that the ld. First Appellate Authority, has passed an ex-parte order due to non-compliance by the assessee. He has not disposed off the appeal on merits. He dismissed the same on the ground of non-prosecution. This cannot be done. Hence, we set aside this issue to the file of the ld. First Appellate Authority for fresh adjudication, on merits. The assessee is directed to appear before the ld. First Appellate Authority on 23rd February, 2018, take notice and thereafter co- operate in disposal of the appeal.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 5th day of January, 2018. Sd/- Sd/- [S.S. Viswanethra Ravi] [J. Sudhakar Reddy] Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated :05.01.2018 {SC SPS} Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Sri Dipak Goswami Prop: M/s. Dias Enterprise Ristey Complex Flat No. G/2/A Mahaprabhu Chak Haldia Township Purba Mednipur – 721 607 2. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Haldia Presently: Income Tax Officer, Ward-27(1) Haldia – 721602 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), Kolkata Benches, Kolkata.

SRI DIPAK GOSWAMI,PURBA MEDINIPUR vs. ITO,WD-1, HALDIA, HALDIA

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