What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that both the assessment order and the appellate order were ex-parte and did not consider the merits of the case. In the interest of justice, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh examination.

The assessee's assessment order and the CIT(A) order were ex-parte. The assessee's representative claimed negligence led to the ex-parte orders and requested another opportunity. The department argued for dismissal due to the assessee's non-appearance.

What were the issues?

Whether ex-parte orders passed without proper representation and consideration of merits warrant a remand for a fresh hearing.

Mohammad Bodrudozza, Murshidabad vs ITO | ITAT Kolkata 2024

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B”BENCH KOLKATA

Before: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Appearances by: Assessee represented by: Sanjib K. Das Sarma Department represented by: Archana Gupta, Addl. CIT Date of concluding the hearing : July 03, 2024 Date of pronouncing the order : July 05, 2024 ORDER

Per Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member:

The above captioned appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (for short ‘CIT(A)’ passed on 20.11.2023 for the Assessment Year 2017-18 against the Assessment Order dated 27.12.2019, passed under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’).

2. At the outset, the Ld. Authorised Representative of the assessee stated before the Bench that the Assessment Order as well as appellate order passed by Ld. CIT(A) both are ex-parte against the assessee, since the assessee could not represent the case properly before both the authorities below due to negligence of the Authorised Representative who did not represent the case of the assessee properly. He further prayed before the bench stating that another opportunity may be given to the assessee so as to assessee can represent its case properly before the authorities below. On the other hand, the Ld. DR stated that the Assessee has not appeared before authorities below although notices were Mohammad Bodrudozza served upon the assessee time to time on the address provided in e-portal. Therefore, such prayer may be rejected by dismissing the appeal of the assessee.

We have heard the rival submission of the parties and perused the material available on record and after considering the contention made by Authorised Representative of parties. We find that the Assessment Order passed by Ld. A.O. and the impugned order challenged before the bench are ex-parte order without properly considering the merit of the case. We therefore, interest of justice and fair play to both the parties. We feel it necessary to remand back the issue to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with the direction to re-examine the issue afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the parties and in case assessee wishes to file any supporting documents before the CIT(A) in that event, remand report may be called from the Assessing Officer on such documents filed by the assessee and decide the case in accordance with law, with the above direction appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. In terms of the above, appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, the appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 5th July, 2024.

MOHAMMAD BODRUDOZZA,MURSHIDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-42(1), KOLKATA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments