VINAY BHATEJA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(2)(1), SURAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 598/SRT/2023Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 November 2023AY 2014-15Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), DR. A. L. SAINI (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that principles of natural justice require granting a sufficient opportunity of being heard. Therefore, the matter was restored to the NFAC/CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee sought an adjournment before the NFAC/CIT(A) but could not submit details due to circumstances beyond their control, leading to an ex parte order. The assessee requested another opportunity to present their case.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a fair opportunity to present their case before the NFAC/CIT(A), and if the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT BENCH, SURAT

Before: SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM

Hearing: 03/11/2023Pronounced: 21/11/2023

आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15, is directed against the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short “NFAC/Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 21.08.2023, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), dated 26.12.2016.

2.

Shri S.K.Kabra, Learned Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, argued that during the appellate proceedings, the assessee sought adjournment and participated in the proceedings before NFAC/Ld.CIT(A), however, assessee could not file the details and documents before NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) due to circumstances beyond

1.

/AY.2014-15 Vinay Bhateja his control, and as a result the NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) passed the ex parte order. The assessee now wish to submit details and documents before NFAC/Ld.CIT(A), hence one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) therefore, matter may be remitted back to the file of NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

3.

On the other hand, Learned Senior-DR for the Revenue submitted that assessee did not appear during appellate proceeding, however, NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) has adjudicated the issue on merit also based on the statement of facts and the facts narrated in the assessment order. Therefore matter should not be remitted back to the file of NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) and the appeal of assessee should be dismissed.

4.

We have heard both the parties. Considering the above facts, we note that assessee could not plead his case successfully before NFAC/Ld.CIT(A). Hence, we are of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before the NFAC/Ld.CIT(A). We note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest its case. Accordingly, we restore the issue back to the file of the NFAC/Ld.C(T(A). The assessee is directed to file relevant details and documents before NFAC/Ld.CIT(A), as and when NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) required and the assessee shall co-operate in the proceedings before the NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) for disposal of his case.

/AY.2014-15 Vinay Bhateja For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed.

5.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order is pronounced on 21/11/2023 in the open court.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →