KAPWORTH INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2, NAGPUR, NAGPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 133/NAG/2024Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 September 2024AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI V. DURGA RAO (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

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

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without considering the merits and sought another opportunity to present their case.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without considering the merits of the case, violating principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO

For Appellant: Shri Abhay Agrawal
For Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

Date of Hearing – 03/09/2024 Date of Order – 03/09/2024

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

The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the impugned order dated 09/01/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2016–17.

2.

In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:–

“1. The learned CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without considering the merits of the case. 2. Whether on the facts and in law, the order passed by learned CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act is bad in law.

2 Kapworth Industries Pvt. Ltd. ITA no.133/Nag./2024

3.

Whether on the facts and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of learned AO in making addition of Rs.1,04,70,000/- on account of long term capital gain.

4.

Without prejudice to other grounds, whether the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the AO grossly erred in not granting benefit of cost of acquisition of said property and also ignoring the fact that, the resultant gain or loss on sale of said property was disclosed in subsequent year.

5.

The Appellant prays leave of the Hon'ble Tribunal to add, amend, alter any of the Grounds of Appeal.”

3. When this appeal is taken up for hearing, the learned Counsel for the 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).

4. 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).

5. 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 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

3 Kapworth Industries Pvt. Ltd. ITA no.133/Nag./2024 without there being a justified reason. Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the assessee in this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 18/09/2024

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →