What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal found that the assessee was not given a fair opportunity to present their case. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside and the matter was remitted back to the AO for fresh assessment.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex parte without detailed reasons. The assessee also remained absent before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the ex parte dismissal of the appeal by the CIT(A) was justified and if the assessee was provided with a proper opportunity of being heard.

Sh. Subhash Chander Gulati, New… vs ITO | ITAT Delhi 2016

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES : SMC : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL

Hearing: 21.11.2016Pronounced: 21.11.2016

Date of Hearing : 21.11.2016 Date of Pronouncement : 21.11.2016 ORDER

This appeal by the assessee relating to the assessment year 2010-11 arises out of the ex-parte order passed by the CIT (Appeals) on 21.07.2016.

Having gone through the relevant material on record, it is observed that the assessment order was passed ex parte u/s 144 of the Act. The assessee remained absent before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. first appellate authority summarily dismissed the assessee’s appeal without assigning any detailed reasons. In the given facts and circumstances of the case, I am satisfied that the assessee has not been given a fair opportunity to put across his point of view before the authorities below. I, therefore, set aside the impugned order and remit the matter to the file of the AO with a direction to make the assessment afresh as per law after allowing an adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

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

The order pronounced in the open court on 21.11.2016.

SH. SUBHASH CHANDER GULATI,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

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