Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA
Before: SHRI SONJOY SARMA & SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI
Present for: Appellant by : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Sanjay Paul, Addl. CIT Date of conclusion of Hearing : 02.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 09.07.2024 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member: These appeals have been preferred by the assessee against the separate orders dated 19-12-2023 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income- tax, Appeals, Addl/JCIT(A)-12, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], passed u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ for the AYs 2011-12 and 2013-14.
The grievance of the assessee is that no proper opportunity was granted by the Ld. CIT(A) before passing the ex parte order. Through the grounds assessee has stated that without considering the fact that the assessee duly filed the written submissions along with the supporting documents passed the impugned order ex parte and it prayed that one more opportunity is granted and the issues be restored to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication upon providing reasonable
We have heard rival contentions and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We notice that the assessee is a private religious trust which e filed its return of income for AY 2011-12 on 28.07.2011 showing total income at Rs.18,83,302/- and for AY 2013-14 on 27.07.2013 showing total income at Rs.18,94,270/-. The said return of income was processed by ACIT vide intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Act for the AYs. 2011-12 and 2013-14 dated 30.03.2013 and 30.03.2015 and the total income computed at Rs.18,83,302/- and 18,94,270/- respectively. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeals before the Ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) has issued several notices as is appearing in his order at page 3 to 4 wherein he has given seven opportunities but neither any compliance received nor any adjournment letter was filed on behalf of the assessee. Hence, Ld. CIT(A) dismissed both the appeals of the assessee ex parte following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of B. N. Bhattacharjee & Anr. (118 ITR 461). Aggrieved, assessee is now in appeal before us.
We have heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. Taking into account the factual matrix of the case, we find it proper to remit the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to pass a speaking order after considering the submissions and explanations and documents furnished by the assessee. Needless to say that assessee be given reasonable opportunity of being heard. We also direct the assessee to be diligent and not to seek adjournment unless warranted by compelling reasons for expeditious disposal of the appeal. Accordingly, we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file for de novo adjudication.