Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal arose from an order dated 28.05.2024 passed by the NFAC for AY 2014-15. This was the second round of litigation, with the first round resulting in a remand order from the Tribunal. The assessee's Authorized Representative (AR) sought an adjournment due to personal preoccupations and misplacement of the case file, but the appeal was decided ex-parte.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee deserved an opportunity to be heard. The assessee was directed to furnish all relevant details and additional evidences to the Ld.CIT(A) for deciding the issues on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity of being heard when the ex-parte order was passed due to the AR's inability to appear for bonafide reasons.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI & SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU
ORDER PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal arises out of the order dated 28.05.2024 passed by NFAC, Delhi for A.Y. 2014-15.
At the outset, the Ld.AR submitted that, this is the second round of litigation before this Tribunal. He submitted that, in the first round, this Tribunal remitted the issue vide order dated
Page 2 of 13.03.2020 to adjudicate the issue raised by the assessee and to pass speaking order in respect of the same. In the remand proceedings, the case migrated to NFAC and notices were issued to the assessee on 01.11.2023, 26.04.2024 and 14.05.2024.
The Ld.AR submitted that, he himself was representing the assessee before the Ld.CIT(A), however due to certain personal preoccupation as well as the shifting of office premises of Ld.AR, the main file of the assessee was misplaced and the first two notices issued by the Ld.CIT(A) could not be accessed by him. In all fairness, he submitted that, thereafter 3rd notice issued on 14.05.2024, the Ld.AR filed adjournment application seeking two weeks time to represent the case of the assessee, as certain additional evidences were required to be filed before the first appellate authority. However, it is submitted that, the Ld.CIT(A) without considering the adjournment application, passed the impugned order on 28.05.2024. He submitted the assessee may be provided with one opportunity as the non-appearance of the assessee is not attributable to assessee and it was due to the bonafide reasons that the Ld.AR himself could not appear. The Ld.DR though opposed could not controvert the submissions of the Ld.AR.
We have perused the submissions advanced by both sides in the light of records placed before us.
We note that assessee in the present facts of the case, deserves an opportunity of being heard before the Ld.CIT(A). The Page 3 of Ld.CIT(A) in deciding the issues on merits. Needless to say that proper opportunity of being heard must be granted to assessee in accordance with law. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 22nd July, 2024.