RABIN DEBNATH,SILIGURI vs. DCIT, CIR-1, SILIGURI, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1319/KOL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 February 2024AY 2017-18Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma (Judicial Member), Shri Girish Agrawal (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's contention that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 22 days, which was condoned. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without providing an opportunity to be heard or file submissions.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without affording the assessee a proper opportunity to present its case.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH ‘B’, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawal]

Hearing: 01.02.2024Pronounced: 02.02.2024

ORDER

Per Sonjoy Sarma, JM:

1.

This appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2017-18 is directed against the order dated 13.09.2023 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax, Appeals, NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘the ‘ld. CIT(A)’].

2.

At the outset, we find that there is a delay of 22 days in filing of the appeal by the assessee. We after perusing the petition for condonation are convinced that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time and hence delay is condoned and appeal is admitted.

3.

At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the order of the ld. CIT(A) is an ex-parte order and nothing has been dealt on merits except reiterating assessment order on the disallowances/additions made by the ld. AO. The assessee could not get any opportunity to file its submissions and other relevant

Rabin Debnath details. Since none of the notices for hearing of the appeal was received by the assessee. Thus, the assessee referring to grounds of the appeal, it has prayed that grounds raised in the instant appeal may be restored to the ld. CIT(A) for adjudicating afresh after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard.

4.

Per contra, ld. DR was fair enough not to oppose this request of the ld. counsel for the assessee.

5.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. Through grounds, the assessee has stated that ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the materials on record and passed the order ex-parte. On perusal of the impugned order, we noticed that the instant ground raised by the assessee has merit as in the impugned order, ld. CIT(A) merely reproduced five grounds of appeal raised by the assessee and the decision part, finding has been given only reiterating the assessment order passed by the ld. AO, as the assessee in the instant case could not able to file necessary details as well as submissions at the time of hearing before the ld. CIT(A) and it is an ex-parte order. Under these given facts and circumstances, we restore the matter in the instant appeal to the file of ld. CIT(A) for adjudicating afresh to pass a speaking order after considering the submission made by the assessee for which reasonable opportunity of being heard should be provided. The assessee also directed to remain vigilant and file necessary documents in support of its grounds of appeal and should not take any further adjournment, unless

Rabin Debnath otherwise required for reasonable cause. In case after providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee, there is no compliance before the ld. CIT(A), then the ld. CIT(A) can proceed to pass the order in accordance with law.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →