RAJKUMARI DHANUKA,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 32(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1463/KOL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 October 2024AY 2012-2013Bench: the Bench.3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s order was indeed ex-parte and lacked merit discussion. To ensure natural justice, the case was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh examination after providing the assessee an opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was directed against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A). The assessee's counsel argued that the order was passed without discussing the merits of the case, violating Section 282 of the Act. The Department did not object to this contention.

What were the issues?

Whether an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) without considering the merits of the case is valid. The necessity of affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 282,Section 250,Section 143(3)/147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA

For Appellant: Adv. : Aryan Kochar, Adv

Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member Shri Sanjay Awasthi, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2012-13 Rajkumari Dhanuka, 113, Park Street, Kolkata - 700016 [PAN: ADUPD7020N] ....…...…………….... Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 32(2), Kolkata, 10B, Middleton Row, Kolkata – 700071 ..............…..…..... Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Anil Kochar, Adv. : Aryan Kochar, Adv. Department represented by : Prabir Gupta Choudhury, Addl. CIT Date of concluding the hearing : 04.09.2024 Date of pronouncing the order : 21.10.2024

ORDER

Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member:

1.

This appeal filed by the Assessee pertaining to the Assessment Year (in short ‘AY’) 2012-13 is directed against the order passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the ‘Act’) by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals), Addl./JCIT(A), Faridabad (in short “the CIT(A)”) dated 29.04.2024 arising out of Assessment Order dated 19.12.2019, passed under Section 143(3)/147 of the Act.

Rajkumari Dhanuka 2. At the outset, the Ld. AR stated that the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is an ex-parte order without discussing on the merit of the case which is against the provisions of section 282 of the Act. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is not in accordance with law and liable to be quashed. On the other hand, on the contention of such prayer made by the AR of the assessee. Ld. DR did not raise any objection to such prayer made by AR before the Bench.

3.

We after hearing the rival submissions of the parties and perusing the material available on record. We find that the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is an ex-parte order and without discussing on the merit of the case which is in against the provision of section 282 of the Act. We therefore, interest of natural justice and fair play to the parties, it is necessary to remand back to the whole issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to re-examine the issue afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to represent its case property by submitting necessary documents in order to substantiate its claim before him. In terms of the above, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

4.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 21st October, 2024.

More judgments on Section 282

All 613 judgments and leading authorities on Section 282 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →