What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's contention that the CIT(A) passed a non-speaking order by dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without assigning reasons. The order of the CIT(A) was set aside.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex parte for non-prosecution. The assessee contended that the CIT(A)'s order was a non-speaking order and lacked reasons.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without assigning reasons is legally sustainable.

Aes Orissa Distribution Pvt… vs ACIT | ITAT Cuttack 2017

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK

Before: S/SHRI N.S SAINI & PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Appellant: Shri B.K.Mohapatra, AR

For Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR

Hearing: 08/08

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK

BEFORE S/SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No. 362/CTK/2015 Assessment Year : 2009-2010

AEs Orissa Distribution Pvt Vs. ACIT, Circle 2(1), Ltd., HIG-4, BDA Colony, Bhubaneswar. Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar. PAN/GIR No.AACCA 6658 H (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)

Assessee by : Shri B.K.Mohapatra, AR Revenue by : Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR

Date of Hearing : 08/08/ 2017 Date of Pronouncement : /08/ 2017

O R D E R Per N.S.Saini, AM This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the

CIT(A)- 1, Bhubaneswar dated 28.5.2015 for the assessment year 2009-

2010.

In Ground No.2 of the appeal, the grievance of the assessee is that

the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal exparte for non-prosecution.

At the outset, ld A.R. of the assessee submitted that CIT(A)

dismissed the assessee's appeal ex parte, for non-prosecution qua the

assessee, without assigning any reason. According to him, the order

passed by the CIT(A) being a non-speaking order, cannot stand in the eye

of law. He prayed that the order of CIT(A) may be set aside with a

2 ITA No . 362/CT K/ 2015 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0

direction to him to decide the grounds of appeal taken before him, on

merit by passing a reasoned order, after hearing the assessee.

Ld D.R. supported the order of the CIT(A).

After considering the rival submissions and perusing the order of

the CIT(A), we find that the CIT(A) in his order has observed that there

was no compliance by the assessee although various opportunities were

given to the assessee to appear before him on 24.11.2014, 15.12.2014,

24.12.2014, 12.2.2015, 30.3.2015, 22.4.2015 and 25.5.2015 and hence,

he has dismissed the appeal of the assessee following the decision of the

Delhi in the case of CIT vs. Multiplan India (P)Ltd., 38 ITD 320 and other

judicial pronouncements. We find force in the contention of the learned

counsel for the assessee that the CIT(A) has simply dismissed the appeal

for non-prosecution qua the assessee, without assigning any reason. The

order of the learned CIT(A) being a non-speaking order, the same is set

aside and the matter is restored back to his file with the direction to pass

a reasoned order in accordance with law, after affording reasonable

opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Since we have remitted the matter to the file of the CIT (A) for deciding afresh, other grounds raised in the appeal on merits of the case are infructuous.

3 ITA No . 362/CT K/ 2015 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 09 /08/2017. Sd/- sd/- (Pavan Kumar Gadale) (N.S Saini) JUDICIALMEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 09 /08/2017 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : AEs Orissa Distribution Pvt Ltd., HIG-4, BDA Colony, Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar 2. The Respondent. ACIT, Circle 2(1), Bhubaneswar. 3. The CIT(A)-1, Bhubaneswar 4. Pr.CIT-1, Bhubaneswar 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack BY ORDER, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, Cuttack

AES ORISSA DISTRIBUTION PVT. LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, BHUBANESWAR

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments