SAURABH PLASTO PRODUCTS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 8(1)(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2439/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 June 2017AY 2009-102 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) and restored the issue to the CIT(A)'s file for fresh adjudication. This was done in the interest of natural justice to provide the assessee with another opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte as the assessee did not appear. The assessee's representative submitted that they did not engage a proper counsel, leading to their absence.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the validity of an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) and the confirmation of an addition relating to alleged bogus purchases.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” Bench, Mumbai

Before: Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM)

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh Shah
For Respondent: Shri Rakesh Ranjan
Hearing: 8.6.2017Pronounced: 8.6.2017

The appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 22.3.2017 passed by the learned CIT(A)-41, Mumbai and it relates to A.Y. 2009-10. The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of the learned CIT(A) in upholding the validity of reopening and also in confirming the addition relating to alleged bogus purchases.

2.

I heard the parties and perused the record. I noticed that the learned CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order since the assessee did not appear before him. At the time of hearing learned AR submitted that the assessee did not engage a proper counsel for appearing before the learned CIT(A) and hence the assessee could not appear before the first appellate authority.

3.

I heard learned Departmental Representative and perused the record. Since the learned CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order without hearing the assessee, I am of the view that the assessee, in the interest of natural justice,

2 Saurabh Plasto Products Pvt.Ltd. should be given one more opportunity in this matter to appear before the learned CIT(A). Accordingly I set aside the order passed by the learned CIT(A) and restore the issue to his file for adjudicating them afresh. The assessee is also directed to appear before the learned CIT(A) without fail, so that the appeal shall be disposed of expeditiously.

4.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order has been pronounced in the Court on 8.6.2017.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →