HITESH ISHWARLAL THAKAR,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3)(7), SURAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 605/SRT/2023Status: DisposedITAT Surat21 November 2023AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), DR. A. L. SAINI (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the ex parte order by the NFAC/CIT(A) violated principles of natural justice. Therefore, the matter was restored to the NFAC/CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication, granting the assessee another opportunity to present their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the NFAC/CIT(A) was decided ex parte without a proper hearing, despite the assessee seeking an adjournment to file documents. The assessee contended that one more opportunity should be granted.

What were the issues?

Whether the NFAC/CIT(A) erred in passing an ex parte order without affording a proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee, violating principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 250(6)

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: 06/11/2023Pronounced: 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) 2017-18, is directed against the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short “NFAC/Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 29.08.2023, 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 30.12.2019.

2.

Shri Rasesh Shah, Learned Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submitted that during the appellate proceedings assessee has participated and filed adjournment application. However, NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) passed non-speaking impugned ex parte order. The Ld. Counsel therefore contended that one more opportunity

1.

/AY.2017-18 Hitesh I Thakar 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).

3.

On the other hand, Learned Senior-DR for the Revenue submitted that assessee did not appear during appellate proceeding therefore NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) 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, at this stage.

4.

We have heard both the parties. Considering the above facts, we note that assessee could not successfully plead his case before NFAC/Ld.CIT(A). The assessee sought adjournment during the appellate proceedings to file details and documents, however, NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) without waiting further, has passed the ex parte order, which is against the principle of natural justice. We also note that NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) did not adjudicate the issue as per the mandate of provisions of Section 250(6) of the Act, on merit. 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 his case. Therefore, we restore the issue back to the file of the NFAC/Ld.CIT(A). We also direct the assessee to furnish relevant documents and evidences, before NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) and assessee

/AY.2017-18 Hitesh I Thakar shall co-operate in the proceedings before NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) for disposal of assessee’s case. 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 →