NOORUDDIN KAZI,INDORE vs. ITO, BURHANPUR, BURHANPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 490/IND/2023Status: DisposedITAT Indore02 April 2024AY 2011-12Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO (Judicial Member), SHRI B.M. BIYANI (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order due to incorrect email communication. Therefore, to uphold principles of natural justice, the matter was remanded back to the Assessing Officer for proper adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte for non-prosecution because notices were sent to an incorrect email address. The assessee argued that they were unaware of the hearings.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte dismissal of the appeal by the CIT(A) due to incorrect notice delivery violates principles of natural justice. Whether the case should be remanded to the CIT(A) or the AO for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147

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 Soumya Bumb, CA
For Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 02.04.2024Pronounced: 02.04.2024

आदेश / O R D E R

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

1.

Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 10.08.2023 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 08.11.2018 passed by learned ITO, Burhanpur [“AO”] u/s 144/147 of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2011-12, the assessee has filed this appeal.

Nooruddin Kazi vs. ITO, Burhanpur

2.

Ld. AR for assessee initially drew our attention to the impugned order to show that the CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order and dismissed assessee’s first-appeal for non-prosecution. Then, he drew us to Form No. 35 (Appeal Memo) filed by assessee to CIT(A) wherein the email address:

Pankajshah@gmail.com was mentioned by assessee in the space provided for sending notices of hearings to assessee. Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A), however, sent notices to the email address: hashirkazi@gmail.com as is evident from a sample notice of hearing sent by CIT(A), copy filed before us. Therefore, Ld. AR submitted, the notices sent by CIT(A) never reached to the email address supplied by assessee and consequently the assessee was not aware of the hearings fixed by CIT(A) and could not make representation. Hence, the case should go back to the file of CIT(A) for an apt adjudication. The Ld. AR, however, went further on submitting that the assessment-order passed by AO is also ex-parte u/s 144/147 of the Act.

Therefore, it would be more appropriate if this case is remanded back to the file of AO instead of CIT(A) so that the AO would be making a proper assessment after considering assessee’s submissions vehemently. Ld. AR asserted that the assessee is ready and willing to make representation before AO if an opportunity is given. Ld. DR would not have any objection to the prayer of Ld. AR but makes a request to direct the assessee to represent his case before AO and do not seek unnecessary adjournments. Being so and having regard to the principle of natural justice and fair play, we remand this matter back to the file of AO for a proper adjudication on merit

Nooruddin Kazi vs. ITO, Burhanpur after giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee, uninfluenced by his earlier order. The assessee is also directed to stay vigilant and ensure participation in the hearings fixed by AO and do not seek unnecessary adjournments. We order accordingly.

3.

Resultantly, this appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in open court on 02.04.2024 immediately on conclusion of hearing and subsequently reduced in writing.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →