VINOD GUPTA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-31(1),KOLKATA, KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found sufficient cause for the assessee's non-appearance, supported by medical certificates and an affidavit. Therefore, the ex-parte order of the CIT(Appeals) was set aside.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(Appeals) was dismissed ex-parte for non-prosecution. The assessee failed to appear for hearings due to his son's medical diagnosis and treatment.
What were the issues?
Whether there was a sufficient cause for the assessee's non-appearance before the CIT(Appeals), leading to an ex-parte dismissal of the appeal.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘B(SMC
Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap
Date of concluding the hearing : March 28, 2017 Date of pronouncing the order : March 31, 2017 O R D E R
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Kolkata dated 29.09.2016 passed ex-parte, whereby he dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non- prosecution.
The assessee in the present case is an individual, who filed his return of income for the year under consideration on 30.03.2014 declaring total income of Rs.1,96,510/-. In the assessment completed under section 143(3) vide an order dated 25.01.2016, the total income of the assessee was determined by the Assessing Officer at Rs.36,04,480/-. Against the said order, an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) and since there was no compliance on the part of the assessee to the notices issued by him from time to time fixing the said appeal for hearings on 09.05.2016, 06.06.2016 and 04.08.2016, the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee vide his impugned ./2016 Assessment year: 2013-2014 Page 2 of 3 order passed ex-parte. Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.
I have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. As submitted by the ld. counsel for the assessee, the assessee could not attend or furnish the requisite papers to the Authorized Representative for hearing before the ld. CIT(Appeals) as his son Shri Aditya Gupta, who is mentally and physically retarded, was under medical diagnosis. Since this submission made by the ld. counsel for the assessee is duly supported by the relevant medical certificates as well as the affidavit filed by the assessee, I am satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for the non-appearance on the part of the assessee at the time of hearings fixed during the course of appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT(Appeals). I, therefore, set aside the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) ex-parte and remit the matter back to him for disposing of the appeal of the assessee afresh after giving proper and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. As undertaken by the ld. counsel for the assessee before me, the assessee shall make due and proper compliance before the ld. CIT(Appeals) in order to enable him to dispose of his appeal expeditiously.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on March 31, 2017.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Shree Sushruta Health Services Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Rst Batteries vs. Deputy Commissioner CGST Delhi West & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Dr.Sunil Kumar Padhi vs. The Chief Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- N.K Fashion Through It Proprietor Mr. Narender Agarwal vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Delhi EastDelhi · 14 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetanj Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026