M/S PHOENIX INFRA ESTATE INTERNATIONAL LTD,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(3), NAGPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 57/NAG/2024Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 October 2024Bench: SHRI V. DURGA RAO (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order. While the Revenue opposed restoring the matter, the Tribunal decided to grant one opportunity to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals before the ITAT challenging the orders of the CIT(A). The assessee remained absent for the hearings before both the CIT(A) and the ITAT, without filing any adjournment applications.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A) despite prior non-appearance, and whether the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) should be set aside.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO & SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER

For Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

Date of Hearing – 24/10/2024 Date of Order – 25/10/2024

O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M.

The present appeals have been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned orders of even date 12/02/2018, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–3, Nagpur, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2007–08, 2008–09, 2009–10 and 2010–11.

2.

When these appeals are taken up for hearing, no one was present on behalf of the assessee to represent its case and assist the Bench for adjudication of its appeals. There is no application for adjournment of hearing

2 M/s. Phoenix Infra Estate International Ltd. to 60/Nag./2024 either. Therefore, we proceed to dispose of the appeals ex–parte qua the assessee after hearing the learned Departmental Representative and on the basis of material available on record.

3.

The learned D.R. submitted that the learned CIT(A) has given sufficient opportunities inspite of that the assesse has not appeared before the learned CIT(A) and not filed relevant details. He strongly supported the orders passed by the learned CIT(A).

4.

We find that the learned CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order. We also find that though the learned CIT(A) gave opportunities to the assessee, ultimately, the order passed by him is an ex-parte order. Though the learned Departmental Representative has opposed for restoring the entire matter to the file of the learned CIT(A), however, we are of the opinion that one opportunity should be granted to the assessee to substantiate its case by restoring the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to enable the assessee to substantiate its case before the learned CIT(A). In view of the above, the orders passed by the learned CIT(A) for all the years under consideration are set aside and remit the matters to the file of the learned CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate the matters afresh after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the assessee in these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.

3 M/s. Phoenix Infra Estate International Ltd. to 60/Nag./2024

5.

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 25/10/2024

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →