GANI BHAI,JATPURA, SOLSINDA, SANWER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), INDORE, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, OPPOSITE WHITE CHURCH, RESIDENCY AREA, INDORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 124/IND/2024Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 June 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO (Judicial Member), SHRI B.M. BIYANI (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, in agreement with both parties, decided to remand the matter back to the Assessing Officer to provide the assessee with an opportunity to present their case and ensure proper adjudication, upholding principles of natural justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an agriculturist, failed to comply with income tax requirements, leading to an ex-parte assessment order. The first appeal before the CIT(A) was also dismissed ex-parte due to the assessee's inability to file details despite adjournment requests.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case before the Assessing Officer after ex-parte orders were passed at both assessment and first appellate stages.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

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 Appellant: Shri Kunal Agrawal, AR
For Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 20.06.2024Pronounced: 26.06.2024

आदेश / O R D E R

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

1.

Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 15.12.2023 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 27.09.2019 passed by learned ITO- 1(1), Indore [“AO”] u/s 144 of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2017-18, the assessee has filed this appeal.

2.

Ld. AR for assessee submitted that the assessee is an agriculturist and not aware to make compliances of income-tax. However, during first- appeal, the assessee filed adjournment requests to the CIT(A), which are noted in the order of CIT(A) on Page No. 3, so as to make necessary arrangement for compliances yet despite all efforts the assessee ultimately missed to file the details which has led the CIT(A) to pass ex-parte order dismissing assessee’s first-appeal. Therefore, in order to grant justice to assessee, who is an agriculturist and saddled with a high burden of liability, this matter should be remanded back to the lower-authorities for adjudication afresh after hearing assessee.

3.

Ld. DR for revenue makes a proposal that the assessment-order is also an ex-parte order u/s 144 due to non-representation by assessee.

Therefore, it would be better to restore this case to the file of AO instead of CIT(A) for a proper disposal. Ld. AR agrees to the submission of Ld. DR.

4.

In view of consensus by both sides and also having regard to the principle of natural justice and fair play, we deem it fit to give one more opportunity to assessee so that the assessee can represent his case before AO for a proper adjudication. Accordingly, we remand this matter to AO for adjudication afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Needless to mention that the AO has pass order uninfluenced by his earlier order. The assessee is also directed to ensure participation in the hearings as may be fixed by AO and do not seek unnecessary adjournments failing which the AO shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law.

5.

Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in open court on 26/06/2024

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →