What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal decided to remand the appeal back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. This was to ensure the assessee is given a sufficient opportunity of being heard as per the principles of natural justice.

The assessee's appeal was filed against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2005-2006. The assessee did not appear before the ITAT despite notices, and the DR conceded that the CIT(A)'s order might have been passed without sufficient opportunity for the assessee.

Abdul Aziz Merchant vs ITO | ITAT Mumbai 2016

Q: What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order was passed without providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, violating principles of natural justice.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO & SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY

For Respondent: Shri A.B. Koli, DR

Hearing: 29.08.2016Pronounced: 23.09.2016

PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee on 17.4.2013 is against the order of the CIT (A)-5, Mumbai dated 17.1.2013 for the assessment year 2005-2006. 2. In this appeal, assessee raised four grounds in toto. In the grounds, assessee raised the issue that the CIT (A)’s order is not proper since the same was passed without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee (Ground no.2).

During the proceedings before us, nobody appeared for the assessee despite issue of notice on various dates including 29.7.2015, 9.2.2016 posting the case to 29.8.2016. Before us, Ld DR fairly mentioned that the order of the CIT (A) was not appreciated by the assessee insofar as the principles of natural justice qua the quality of the hearing undertaken during the first appellate proceedings.

On going through the order of the CIT (A) in column no.11 on the title sheet, it is evident that the said order of the CIT (A) was passed without having attendance of the assessee. Considering the above facts, we are of the opinion, this appeal should be remanded to the file of the CIT (A) for fresh adjudication after granting

sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee as per the principles of natural justice. Assessee is also directed to make arrangements to receive the notices from the CIT (A) properly and attend the proceedings without fail. If the non-cooperation continues, CIT (A) is free to pass any order that he may deem fit and as per the provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 23rd September, 2016. (SAKTIJIT DEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER भुंफई Mumbai; ददनांक 23.09.2016 व.नन.स./ OKK , Sr. PS आदेश की प्रतिलऱपि अग्रेपिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अऩीराथी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्मथी / The Respondent. 3. आमकय आमुक्त(अऩीर) / The CIT(A)- आमकय आमुक्त / CIT 4. ववबागीम प्रनतननधध, आमकय अऩीरीम अधधकयण, भुंफई / DR,

ITAT, Mumbai गार्ड पाईर / Guard file. 6. सत्मावऩत प्रनत ////

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उि/सहायक िंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.

ABDUL AZIZ MERCHANT,MUMBAI vs. ITO 16(3)(4), MUMBAI

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