M/S SANKLAP TRACOM (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-5(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 781/KOL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 November 2017AY 2008-092 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the impugned order passed by the CIT(A) due to it being an ex parte order and a violation of natural justice. The matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal pertains to Assessment Year 2008-09. The impugned order from the CIT(A) was an ex parte order, meaning the assessee could not present their case. The assessee had filed written submissions which were allegedly not considered by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order was passed in violation of natural justice by being ex parte and not considering the assessee's submissions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Kumar, Advocate
Hearing: 20/11/2017Pronounced: 29/11/2017

O R D E R

Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM:

1.

The captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2008-09, is directed against the order passed by the ld Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2,Kolkata,in Appeal No.1602/CIT(A)-2/2014-15, dated 20.01.2016, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer under sections143(3)/263/143(3)/147 of the Income Tax Act 1961, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’), dated 24.03.2014.

2.

At the outset, itself the Ld.AR pointed out that the impugned order is an ex parte order and therefore, the assessee could not plead his case before the Ld. CIT(A) , he prayed that the matter may be remanded back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The Ld. DR did not have any objection if the matter is remitted before the Ld. CIT(A). We note that the assessment was carried out under sections 143(3)/263/143(3)/147, of the Act and the impugned order is an ex parte order. We do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →