SMT. DAKSHA P.SHAH,BARODA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-3(1), BARODA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2197/AHD/2014Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 October 2017AY 2004-052 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in summarily dismissing the appeal without adjudicating on merits. The matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication after providing the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-response to hearing notices. The assessee, a senior citizen residing in the USA, claimed notices were not served, leading to her inability to appear.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without deciding the merits. Whether the assessee's reasons for non-appearance before the CIT(A) were valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

ITA No. 2197/Ahd/2014 Smt Daksha P Shah vs. ITO Assessment year: 2004-05 Page 1 of 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM and Rajpal Yadav JM] ITA No. 2197/Ahd/2014 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Smt Daksha P Shah .......…………...........Appellant 301, Ameedhara, Vrundavan Colony, Ellora Park, Baroda – 390 007 [PAN : AJOPS 2924 C] Vs. Income-Tax Officer ............................Respondent Ward 3 (1), Vadodara Appearances by: Aseem Thakkar for the appellant Mudit Nagpal for the respondent Date of concluding the hearing : 25.10.2017 Date of pronouncing the order : 27.10.2017 O R D E R Per Pramod Kumar AM: 1. This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against learned CIT(A)-II, Baroda’s ex-parte order dated 03.02.2014 in the matter of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2004-05.

2.

The appeal is time barred by 61 days, but the assessee has moved a condonation petition, on which we have heard both the parties. The assessee is a very senior citizen and, is in her 70s, and is living in USA with her son. She periodically visits India and, for this reason, there was a delay in filing of appeal. The explanation so given by the assessee appeals to us and we, therefore, condone the delay.

3.

We now proceed to take up the matter on merits. Coming to the appeal on merits, we find that CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order summarily dismissing the appeal of the assessee on the ground that the assessee did not respond to the notices of hearing issued by him. There is no adjudication on merits at all.

4.

Learned counsel for the assessee submits that the notices were not served on the assessee and there was thus a bona fide reason for not appearing before the CIT(A) in response to the notices. In any case, learned counsel submits that it is not open to the CIT(A) to summarily dismiss the appeal without addressing the merits of the grievances raised before him. He thus contends that the matter should be remitted to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits after giving yet another

ITA No. 2197/Ahd/2014 Smt Daksha P Shah vs. ITO Assessment year: 2004-05 Page 2 of 2 opportunity of hearing to the assessee. He further undertakes to scrupulously comply with all the notices of hearing issued by the CIT(A). Learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, does not oppose the prayer of the assessee, but submits that we should give proper direction so as to ensure proper compliance to the notices of hearing in future.

5.

Having heard the rival contentions and having perused the material on record, we are of the considered view that it is a fit case for matter being remitted to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits of the case after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. In coming to this conclusion, we have taken note of the fact that CIT(A) had a statutory obligation to decide the matter on merits, and, therefore, he has clearly committed an error by disposing of the appeal summarily. We also direct the assessee to ensure that the matter before the CIT(A) is properly represented and the notices of hearing are duly complied with. With these observations and directions, the matter stands remitted to the file of the CIT(A).

6.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open court today on the 27th day of October, 2017.

Sd/- Sd/-

Rajpal Yadav Pramod Kumar (Judicial Member) (Accountant Member) Ahmedabad, the 27th day of October, 2017 **bt Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) Commissioner (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order TRUE COPY Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad benches, Ahmedabad

1.

Date of dictation: ......27.10.2017.- ... 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member: ... 27.10.2017........ 3. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr. P.S./P.S.: …27.10.2017....... . 4. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for Pronouncement: . 27.10.2017. 5. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk : ... 30.10.2017... 6. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk : ……………………………. 7. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order: ……………………..

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →