SHRI HARSHAD THAKOTBHAI PATEL,DAMAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , DAMAN WARD, DAMAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 181/SRT/2019Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 April 2023AY 2009-10Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), DR. A. L. SAINI (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee could not plead their case and the CIT(A) did not pass an order on merits. Therefore, the Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication, granting the assessee another opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2009-10 was directed against an order passed by the CIT(A). The assessee contended that they could not represent their case before the CIT(A) due to non-receipt of hearing notices, making the order ex parte and violating natural justice.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex parte order passed by the CIT(A) violated the principles of natural justice due to non-receipt of hearing notices. Whether the CIT(A) passed the order on merits as per the mandate of the Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,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

For Appellant: Shri P. M. Jagasheth, CA
For Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 27/04/2023

आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to the Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10, is directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Valsad [in short “the ld. CIT(A)”] in Appeal No.CIT(A)/VLS/603/16-17/2200, dated 08.01.2019 which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by Assessing Officer u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).

2.

At the outset itself, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee assailed the impugned order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and the order being an ex parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of principle of natural justice. Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that during the appellate proceedings, notice of hearing was not received and as a result the assessee could not attend the appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT(A). In the order of Ld. CIT(A), there is no finding that any notice was issued to the assessee on a particular date. The Ld.

1.

ITA.181/SRT/2019/AY.2009-10 Harshad Thakorbhai Patel Counsel for the assessee contended that in the interest of justice, another opportunity to contest the appeal before the Ld. first appellate authority may be granted to the assessee.

3.

The ld. DR for the Revenue debarred from objecting the stand of the Learned Counsel.

4.

Considering the above facts, we note that assessee could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A). We also note that Ld. CIT(A) has not passed the order as per the mandate of provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. That is ld. CIT(A) did not pass order on merit based on the material available on record. Hence, we are of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before the 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, 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(A) 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(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. 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 27/04/2023 in the open court.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →