Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”, BENCH MUMBAI
Before: SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM
आदेश / O R D E R PER R.C.SHARMA (A.M):
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the ex-parte order of CIT(A)-44, Mumbai dated 21/06/2016 for the A.Y.2010-11 in the matter of order passed u/s.2010-11.
It was argued by learned AR that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeals - 44, Mumbai erred in passing the ex-parte order by holding that assessee has not attended the hearings before him which is absolutely incorrect as there are enough documentary evidences available with the assessee and also as per order sheet entries before the learned CIT(A), that the assessee has attended hearings on 24/05/2016 and on 10/06/2016 but as the learned CIT(A) was busy, the case was M/s. Magma Industriews adjourned to 17/06/2016 and the notice of first hearing on 21/04/2016 was received on same day.
Learned AR has drawn our attention to the adjournment petition filed before the CIT(A) on 10/06/2016 requesting that since he was suffering from high fever, adjournment should be granted. However, the CIT(A) did not agree for any adjournment and passed ex-parte order.
On the other hand, learned DR supported the order of the lower authorities.
I have considered rival contentions and found from record that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeals - 44, Mumbai has passed the order ex-parte despite the fact that the notice of first hearing was received on the date of hearing itself i.e. 21/04/2016 so the hearing was adjourned to 24/05/2016. On 24/05/2016, the learned CIT(A) was busy and the hearing was adjourned from his end to 10/06/2016. On 10/06/2016, the assessee's AR was suffering from high fever. A letter stating this fact was filed on 10106/2016 and hearing was adjourned to 17/06/2016. The assessee’s AR could not recover from his high fever before 17/06/2016 and therefore could not attend the hearing on 17/06/2016. After getting well, the AR attended the office of learned CIT (A) on 20/06/2016 but he was informed that the order has been passed ex-parte. The said ex-parte order is bad in law as the circumstances in which the non attendance resulted were beyond the control of the assessee.