What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's contention that the CIT(A)'s order was non-speaking. The order of the CIT(A) was set aside, and the matter was restored for a fresh decision.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte for non-prosecution. The assessee contended that the CIT(A)'s order was non-speaking and lacked reasons.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order dismissing the appeal ex-parte for non-prosecution without assigning reasons is valid.

Debabrata Patnaik, Bhubaneswar vs ITO | ITAT Cuttack 2017

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH CUTTACK

Before: SHRI N.S.SAINI

Hearing: 28/12/2017Pronounced: 28/12/2017

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, dated 31.8.2017. 2. In Ground No.4 of the appeal, the grievance of the assessee is that the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal ex-parte for non-prosecution.

At the outset, ld A.R. of the assessee submitted that CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex parte, for non-prosecution qua the assessee, without assigning any reason. According to him, the order passed by the CIT(A) being a non-speaking order, cannot stand in the eye of law. He prayed that the order of CIT(A) may be set aside with a direction to him to decide the grounds of appeal taken before him, on merit by passing a reasoned order, after hearing the assessee.

Ld D.R. supported the order of the CIT(A).

After considering the rival submissions and perusing the order of the CIT(A), we find that the CIT(A) in his order has observed that there

2 was no compliance by the assessee although various opportunities were given to the assessee to appear before him on 27.4.2017, 7.8.2017 & 23.8.2017 and hence, he has dismissed the appeal of the assessee following the decision of the Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India (P)Ltd., 38 ITD 320 and other judicial pronouncements. We find force in the contention of the learned counsel for the assessee that the CIT(A) has simply dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution qua the assessee, without assigning any reason. The order of the learned CIT(A) being a non-speaking order, the same is set aside and the matter is restored back to his file with the direction to pass a reasoned order in accordance with law, after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Since we have remitted the matter to the file of the CIT (A) for deciding afresh, other grounds raised in the appeal on merits of the case are infructuous.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 28/12/2017. (N. S. SAINI) ऱेखा सदस्य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER कटक Cuttack; ददनांक Dated 28/12/2017 प्र.कु.मम/PKM, Senior Private Secretary आदेश की प्रनिलऱपप अग्रेपषि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent-

ITO, Ward-2(1), Bhubaneswar 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. 3 निभागीय प्रनतनिनर्, आयकर अपीलीय अनर्करण, कटक / DR, ITAT, Cuttack 5. गार्ड फाईऱ / Guard file. 6. सत्यापपत प्रतत ////

आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER,

(Senior Private Secretary) आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक / ITAT, Cuttack

DEBABRATA PATNAIK,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments