RANVEER SINGH CHHABRA,INDORE (MP) vs. ITO-2(4) INDORE, INDORE (MP)

PDF · subscribers
ITA 217/IND/2024Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 July 2024AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO (Judicial Member), SHRI B.M. BIYANI (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's submissions and agreed with the consensus of both parties. The matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after providing an opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) for non-prosecution. The assessee contended that the hearings were scheduled during the Covid period and a request for adjournment for the last hearing was overlooked.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order was passed ex-parte without proper adjudication and whether the assessee was denied a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI B.M. BIYANI

For Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 30.07.2024Pronounced: 30.07.2024

आदेश / O R D E R

Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:

1.

Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 17.01.2024 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 31.12.2019 passed by learned ITO- 2(4), Indore [“AO”] u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2012-13, the assessee has filed this appeal.

Shri Ranveer Singh Chhabra, Indore.

2.

Ld. AR for assessee submitted that the CIT(A) has passed impugned order ex-parte qua assessee for non-prosecution and rejected all grounds of assessee summarily without proper adjudication. She further submitted that as per para 4.1 of impugned order, the CIT(A) fixed three hearings out of which first two hearings on 11.03.2020 and 21.01.2021 were during Covid period. The third and last hearing was fixed vide notice dated 27.10.2023 on 06.11.2023 for which the assessee sought adjournment vide application dated 06.11.2023 vide acknowledgement no. 504070021061123, but the CIT(A) has, due to oversight, mentioned non-compliance. Ld. AR also placed on record a copy of adjournment application filed by assessee to CIT(A). In these circumstances, Ld. AR prayed to remand present matter to CIT(A) for adjudication afresh after hearing assessee. Ld. DR for revenue agrees with the submissions and prayer of Ld. AR.

3.

In view of above facts and consensus by both sides, we are remanding this matter back to the file of CIT(A) for a proper adjudication on merit after giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee, uninfluenced by his earlier order in any manner. The assessee is also directed to ensure participation in the hearings as may be fixed by CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments failing which the CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law.

Shri Ranveer Singh Chhabra, Indore.

4.

Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in open court immediately after conclusion of hearing and subsequently reduced in writing on the very same day.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →