Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed by the NFAC. The assessee had previously filed an appeal before the CIT(A) against an order dated 02/05/2023. The CIT(A) issued three notices in July 2024 for hearing, but there was no response from the assessee. Consequently, the CIT(A) upheld the AO's order.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had issued only three notices in a single month, which might not have provided sufficient opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, the Tribunal decided to grant the assessee one more opportunity.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee was provided with sufficient opportunities by the CIT(A) for hearing and representation, and if not, should the matter be remanded for fresh consideration.
Sections Cited
154 of the Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, BANGALORE
Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI KESHAV DUBEY
PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the NFAC, Delhi dated 28/08/2024 in DIN No. ITBA/NFAC/S/ 250/2024-25/1068088954(1) for the assessment year 2021-22.
At the outset, it was noticed that the appeal was filed by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) dated 16/05/2023 against the order dated 02/05/2023. Thereafter, the ld. CIT(A) has issued 3 notices in the month of July 2024 only intimating the date of hearing. But there was no response from the side of the assessee, therefore, the ld. CIT(A) in the absence of any co-operation from the side of the assessee has upheld the order of the AO passed u/s 154 of the Act. However, the ld. AR before us submitted that the assessee has not been offered sufficient opportunities by the ld. CIT(A). As per the ld. AR, the ld. CIT(A) has granted only 3 opportunities to the assessee by issuing 3 notices in a single month i.e. July 2024. According to the ld. AR, the ld. CIT-A ought to have granted more opportunity in the subsequent month by issuing notice intimating the date of hearing. Nevertheless, the ld. AR before us undertook the responsibility on behalf of the assessee for necessary compliances before the ld. CIT(A). Thus, the ld. AR prayed before us to set aside the issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law.
On the other hand, the ld. DR opposed to grant another opportunity to the assessee on the ground that the assessee has already been granted sufficient opportunities. The ld. DR vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below.
We have heard the rival contentions of both the parities and perused the materials available on record. Considering the facts discussed above i.e. that the ld. CIT(A) has issued 3 notices intimating the date of hearing only in single month i.e. July 2024, accordingly, we are of the view that the assessee deserves one more opportunity to represent his case before the ld. CITA). Thus, we set aside the finding of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the issue back to him [the CIT(A)] for fresh consideration and adjudication the issue involved in the present appeal as per the provisions of law. Hence, the ground raised by the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.