GOUTAM KUMAR CHAKRABORTY,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 55(2), KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) order was indeed ex-parte. To ensure justice, the Tribunal decided to remand the issue back to the CIT(A) for a fresh examination after providing a proper hearing opportunity.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) for AY 2011-12. The assessee contended that they were not provided a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) order was passed ex-parte without providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA
Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member:
This appeal filed by the assessee pertaining to the Assessment Year (in short ‘AY’) 2011-12 is directed against the order passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the ‘Act’) by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Gwalior dated 21.02.2024 arising out of Assessment Order dated 07.12.2016, passed under Section 144/147 of the Act.
Goutam Kumar Chakraborthy 2. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in passing an ex-parte order without providing reasonable opportunity of hearing.
2. For that the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered that the reasons to believe were not provided/invalid/improper, thereby, vitiating the reopening proceedings.
3. For that the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition made by the A.O. of Rs. 18,66,931/- under the head Long Term Capital gains.
4. The appellant craves leave to add further grounds of appeal or alter the grounds at the time of hearing.”
3. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR stated that the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is an ex-parte order and assessee did not get any opportunity to represent its case properly. Therefore, another opportunity may be given to the assessee so that assessee can represent its case properly before the Ld. CIT(A).
4. On the other hand, the Ld. DR objected to such prayer made by the AR of the assessee, he stated that ample opportunities have been given to the assessee before passing such impugned order. However, the assessee nor its representative filed any response in compliance to the notices issued by the CIT(A). Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) has no other alternative but to pass as an ex-parte order. We after hearing the rival submission 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. Although notices were served upon the assessee but AR of the assessee did not represent the case properly and due to this reason an ex-parte order was passed against the assessee. We after considering the facts of the case, and interest of justice find it necessary to remand back the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a 2
Goutam Kumar Chakraborthy direction to re-examine the issue afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) as and when notice for hearing issued from Ld. CIT(A) on such date without any fail. In terms of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 24th July, 2024.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ratul Boro vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Jashwant Sharma vs. The Union Of INDIA And A4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Jeyarani Shopping Centre vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer -1/The Deputy Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 14 Oct 2026
- Rohan Tanna vs. Directorate General Of Goods And Services Tax IntelligenceChhattisgarh · 14 Oct 2026
- Dipak Saikia vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026