What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order despite giving several opportunities. To uphold the principles of natural justice, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remitted the matter back for fresh adjudication.

The assessee filed an appeal challenging a penalty order upheld by the CIT(A). The assessee's counsel requested another opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A) as the previous order was ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in upholding the penalty when the order was passed ex-parte and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case.

Nitin Prabhakar Vaidya vs ITO | ITAT Nagpur 2024

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

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

For Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Date of Hearing – 23/09/2024 Date of Order – 24/09/2024

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

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 25/10/2017, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2013–14.

Following grounds have been raised by the assessee:–

“1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) NFAC has erred in law by upholding the penalty of Rs.1,76,531/- levied on the assessee. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) NFAC has erred in law by upholding the penalty when there was no concealment of income nor any inaccurate particulars were submitted by the assessee.”

2 Nitin Prabhakar Vaidya ITA no.67/Nag./2024

When this appeal is taken up for hearing, the learned Counsel for the 3. assessee submitted that the learned CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order and prayed that one more opportunity may be given to the assessee to substantiate its case before the learned CIT(A).

On the other hand, 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).

We have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. We find that though the learned CIT(A) gave several opportunities to the assessee, ultimately, the order passed by him is an ex-parte order. Therefore, we are of the opinion that by following the principles of natural justice, one more opportunity should be given to the assesse to substantiate his case before the learned CIT(A). In view of the above, the order passed by the learned CIT(A) is set aside and remit the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate the matter 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 this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.

3 Nitin Prabhakar Vaidya ITA no.67/Nag./2024

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 24/09/2024

NITIN PRABHAKAR VAIDYA,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(5), NAGPUR, NAGPUR

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