SH. VISHAL SINGH,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT, C-1(1), CHANDIGARH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 568/CHANDI/2018Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 July 2018AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee's absence was not intentional and that the interest of justice would be served by allowing the assessee to present their case. Therefore, the CIT(A)'s order was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte because the notice of hearing was not served due to a change of address. The assessee claimed this was unintentional and sought an opportunity to present their case on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) should be set aside to allow the assessee to present their case on merits due to non-receipt of hearing notice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH BENCHES, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG & Ms. ANNAPURNA GUPTA

For Respondent: Smt. Chanderkanta, Sr.DR
Hearing: 16.07.2018Pronounced: 01.08.2018

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 21.07.2017 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Gurgaon [hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)].

2.

At the outset, the Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the impugned order of the CIT(A) is an ex-parte order. It has been submitted that the address of the assessee had changed, therefore, the notice of date of hearing could not be served upon the assessee. The assessee was not aware of the date of hearing before the CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) has himself noted to

2 ITA No.568-c-2018- Shri Nirankar Singh, Mohali

this effect in the impugned order that apparently the appellant had shifted

from his original residence without informing about the change of residence

to the office of the CIT(A). The Ld. AR has submitted that the assessee

inadvertently could not inform the CIT(A) about the change of address. That

the absence of the assessee before the CIT(A) was unintentional. He has

further submitted that the only issue involved in this appeal is regarding

disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. The assessee has a good case on this issue.

He has submitted that the assessee may be given a chance to put his case

before the CIT(A) on merits.

3.

We have considered the rival submissions. As per the facts put before us,

in our view, the absence of the assessee before the CIT(A) on the date of

hearing was not intentional, but owing to the non-receipt of the notice of date

of hearing. Further, in our view, the interest of justice will be well served if

the assessee is given opportunity to present his case properly before CIT(A).

Hence, the impugned order of the CIT(A) is hereby set aside and the matter is

restored to the file of the CIT(A) for deciding the same afresh on merits, in

accordance with law. Needless to say that the assessee will promptly appear

before the CIT(A), as and when called for, and will not contribute in

unnecessary adjournment of the case.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for

statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Open Court.

(ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 01. 08.2018 Rkk

3 ITA No.568-c-2018- Shri Nirankar Singh, Mohali

Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR

More judgments on Section 14A

All 15,875 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →