What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remanded the matter back for fresh adjudication. The assessee was granted an opportunity to present their case and evidence before the CIT(A).

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte because the assessee failed to appear on multiple occasions. The CIT(A) confirmed the assessment order passed by the AO.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without affording a proper opportunity to the assessee to present their case.

M/S Nimbus Foods Ltd. vs ACIT | ITAT Indore 2022

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: Ms. MADHUMITA ROY & SHRI BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI

For Appellant: Shri C.P. Rawka, CA

For Respondent: Shri P. K. Singi, Addl. CIT-DR

Hearing: 26.07.2022

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE (CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT) BEFORE Ms. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI BHAGIRATH MAL BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Assessment Year: 2014-15) M/s. Nimbus Foods Ltd. Vs. ACIT-3(1), 2nd Floor, Akansha Trade Indore Centre, Opp. Omini Palace, South Tukoganj, Indore PAN No.AACCN3880G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri C.P. Rawka, CA Respondent by : Shri P. K. Singi, Addl. CIT-DR Date of Hearing 26.07.2022 10 .08.2022 Date of Pronouncement O R D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM:

The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 18.02.2020 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-1, Indore whereby and whereunder the assessment order dated 30.11.2016 passed by the ACIT-3(1), Indore under Section 143(3) of the Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for A.Y. 2014-15 has been confirmed.

We have heard the rival submissions made by the respective parties, and we have also perused the relevant materials available on record.

It appears that before the First Appellate Authority though the matter was fixed on several occasions almost 13 none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Only in few occasions the assessee filed adjournment application of the matter. Having no other alternative the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal confirming the order passed by the Ld. AO. M/s. Nimbus Foods Ltd. vs. ACIT Asst.Year –2014-15 - 2 – It is a fact that the order was passed by the Ld. CIT(A) ex-parte but it is also a fact that to be considered that the assessee has not been able to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) to represent his case for some reason or the other and the order passed by the Ld. AO stood confirmed. However, since the issue has been finally decided by the Ld. CIT(A) ex-parte when the assessee has not been able to represent his case properly, for the ends of justice, in our considered opinion a further opportunity of being heard to be given to the assessee for proper adjudication of the matter on merit.

Hence, we set-aside the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with the direction upon him to consider the matter afresh and to pass a reasoned order upon affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon considering the relevant materials and/or evidences which the assessee may choose to file at the time of hearing of the matter. We also make it clear that the assessee would not ask for any unnecessary adjournment and would cooperate with best of his effort with the authorities below during the course of hearing of the matter. Hence, the appeal preferred by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

M/S NIMBUS FOODS LTD.,INDORE vs. ACIT-3(1), INDORE, INDORE

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