MR. PRABIR PAUL,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-33(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1856/KOL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 February 2017AY 2010-113 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee did not get a proper opportunity of being heard before the CIT(A). Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed for non-prosecution as no one appeared on behalf of the assessee on several occasions. The assessee claimed they did not receive some notices and faced issues with the availability of the CIT(A) on other dates.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was afforded a proper opportunity of being heard before the CIT(A) when their appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH : KOLKATA

Before: Hon’ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ]

Per N.V.Vasudevan, JM

1.

This is an appeal by the Assessee against the order dated 30.03.2016 of CIT(A)- 9, Kolkata relating to AY 2010-11.

2.

The assessee had filed an appeal against the order of AO passed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 28.03.2013. According to CIT(A) the appeal was listed for hearing on several occasions. But none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Therefore he dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non prosecution.

3.

Before us it is the plea of the assessee that the A/R has duly appeared on 29/07/2015 and filed the written submission, which has duly been mentioned by the C.I.T.(A) in his appeal order. Therefore the notice dated 22/07/205 has duly been complied with. As far as the notices dated 14/04/2015, 17/06/2015 and 22/07/2015, it is the plea of the Assessee that he had not received any of those notices. As far as hearing on 12/08/2016 it has been stated that the C.I.T.(A) was not in station on that date. In respect of notice dated 17.12.2015 the same was duly complied and the A/R appeared before CIT(A) but Mr.Prabir Paul A.Yr.2010-11 was C.I.T.(A) was not available. Notice dated 07.03.2016 have never ever received by the assessee.

4.

The learned counsel for the Assessee reiterated the stand taken by the Assessee as mentioned in paragraph 3 above. The learned DR relied on the order of the CIT(A). After considering the rival submissions we are of the view that the assessee did not have proper opportunity of being heard before CIT(A). Accordingly order of CIT(A) is set aside and CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeal afresh after affording the asssessee opportunity of being heard. The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

5.

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Court on 03.02.2017.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →