THE SURAT COLOUR CHEMICAL MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION,SURAT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

Notice of hearing of this appeal was sent to the assessee at the address given by the assessee in Form No.36. The said notice has not been returned unserved. Today when the case was called for hearing, none appeared on behalf of assessee, however we have received adjournment application. We note that ld CIT(E) has passed an ex parte order and solitary grievance of the assessee in the grounds of appeal raised before us that ld CIT(E ) has not given opportunity of hearing. This Tribunal has remitted similar cases to the file of the ld The Surat Colour Chemical Merchants Association CIT(E ), directing the ld CIT(E ) to provide sufficient opportunity to the assessee and pass order in accordance with law. In these circumstances, we have heard learned Departmental Representative (ld. DR) for the Revenue. The ld. DR for the Revenue pointed out that in the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee, it is stated that during the proceedings before the ld. CIT(E), the notices of hearing were not served on the assessee, therefore the ld. CIT(E) passed the ex parte order. The solitary grievance of the assessee in the grounds of appeal raised by him along with Form No.36 is that ld. CIT(E) has erred in not providing adequate opportunity of being heard and therefore overlooked the principle of natural justice. Therefore, ld DR stated that in these circumstances, the Tribunal cannot adjudicate the issue on merit, hence ld DR prays the Bench that matter may be remitted back to the file of ld CIT(E ) for fresh adjudication on merit.

We have gone through the order of ld. CIT(E) and noted that assessee did not appear before him, therefore the ld. CIT(E) has passed the ex parte order considering the material available on record. We note that Learned Departmental Representative (ld. DR) for the Revenue did not have any objection if the matter is remitted back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) for fresh adjudication. We note that notices issued by the ld. CIT(E) during the proceedings, have not been served on the assessee, therefore, we note that assessee could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(E), hence we are of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before the ld. CIT(E).

We note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient The Surat Colour Chemical Merchants Association opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(E) for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(E) and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(E) to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed.

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