What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that no person should be condemned unheard, even with some laxity on the assessee's part. Therefore, the appeal was remanded back to the First Appellate Authority for a decision on merit.

The assessee's appeal before the First Appellate Authority was decided ex-parte. The assessee contended that a proper opportunity was not provided as their counsel was attending a marriage function.

What were the issues?

Whether the First Appellate Authority erred by deciding the appeal ex-parte without providing a proper opportunity to the assessee.

Iqbal Ahmed Khalilamed Subedar vs ITO | ITAT Mumbai 2016

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “SMC”, MUMBAI

Before: Shri Joginder Singh,

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Kumar-DR

Hearing: 07/09/2016

आदेश / O R D E R

The assessee is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 27/02/2015 of the Ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai.

Mr. Iqbal Ahmed Khalilahmed Subedar The only ground raised in the present appeal pertains to not providing proper opportunity and deciding the case not on merit.

During hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee, Shri S.C. Tiwari along with Rutuja Pawar, contended that proper opportunity was not provided to the assessee as adjournment could not be granted to the assessee as the counsel Shri H.S. Parekh was busy in a marriage function. On the other hand, the ld. DR, Shri Sumit Kumar, contended that the assessee sought unnecessary adjournment, therefore, there was no option but to pass an ex-parte order.

2.1. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. I have also perused the factual matrix and the dates on which non-attended on behalf of the assessee. It is seen that the assessee vide letter dated 22/01/2015 asked for adjournment as there was a marriage function in relation of the counsel for the assessee. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) passed an ex- parte order. Admittedly, there is some laxity on the part of the assessee also but still I am of the view that no person should be condemned unheard, therefore, this appeal is remanded back to the file of the First Appellate Authority to decide the appeal on merit. The assessee be given opportunity of being heard. However, keeping in view, the totality of facts, the assessee is also directed to cooperate for the early disposal of the appeal and approach the office of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) within one month

Mr. Iqbal Ahmed Khalilahmed Subedar from the receipt of this order. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) is free to adjudicate the appeal on a mutually pre-decided date. The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Finally, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

This order was pronounced in the open in the presence of ld. representative from both sides at the conclusion of the hearing on 07/09/2016.

IQBAL AHMED KHALILAMED SUBEDAR,MUMBAI vs. ITO 22(1)(2), NAVI MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments