SRI AMRIK SINGH,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T CIR - 29,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1678/KOL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 May 2016AY 2004-054 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that there was a reasonable cause for the assessee's non-appearance before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) had not decided the appeal on merits, so the order was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed for non-prosecution due to the assessee's inability to attend hearings. The assessee later provided an affidavit explaining that a personal accident prevented him from attending and informing his representative.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without providing an adequate opportunity of hearing, and if the reasons for non-appearance constituted a reasonable cause.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 254

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH : KOLKATA

Before: Hon’ble Shri P.M.Jagtap, AM & Sri N.V.Vasudevan, JM ]

Heard together (2 matters)

I.T.A No. 1678/Kol/2013
ITA No.1819/Kol/2007

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

This is an appeal by the Assessee against the order dated 08.03.2013 of CIT(A)- XVII, Kolkata, relating to AY 2004-05.

2.

Ground of appeal

raised by the assessee read as follows :- “1.) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deciding the appeal on exparte view without allowing, reasonable, adequate and effective opportunity of hearing. 2.) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) is wrong and unjustified in not deciding the appeal on merit by referring to decision reported at 90 ITR 271 (SC). 3.) That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, adduce or amend any ground or grounds on or before the date of hearing of the appeal.”

3. The Assessee is an individual. He derives income from business and income from other sources. An order of assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act was passed on 22.12.2006 for A.Y.2004-05. On the additions made in the said order of assessment

Shri Amrik Singh A.Yr.2004-05 ultimately an appeal was filed before the Hon’ble ITAT. The Hon’ble ITAT in dated 11.03.2008 set aside the order of AO in respect of two additions made in the assessment and remanded the same to the AO for fresh consideration.

4.

In the order passed u/s 143(3) r.w. s. 254 of the Act pursuant to the order of Tribunal, assessment was again completed by which the issue which were remanded by the Tribunal were decided against the assessee. Against the said order the assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non prosecution. In this regard CIT(A) has observed in his order that the appeal was fixed for hearing on 15.02.2011 and at the request of the AR of the assessee hearing was adjourned to 21.02.2011. None attended the hearing on 21.02.2011. Again the appeal was fixed for hearing on 07.01.2013 and none attended on behalf of the assessee. The appeal was again fixed on 24.01.2013 and none appeared on behalf of the assessee on the said date. Similarly appeal was fixed on 07.02.2013 and 22.02.2013 and even on these occasions none appeared on behalf of the assessee. In the given circumstances CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by observing that no material was brought to the notice of CIT(A) to show that the decision of AO was arbitrary, biased and irrational.

5.

Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A) assessee has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal.

6.

Before us the learned counsel for the assessee filed an affidavit of the assessee in which it has been explained that Shri Sanjay Tiwari, Authorised Representative of the assessee appeared before CIT(A) on 15.02.2011. It appears that in the month of December, 2012 the assessee met with an accident and he was advised bed rest by the doctors. Notice fixing the hearing of assessee’s appeal before CIT(A) were not brought to the notice of the assessee by his family members and hence he could not intimate his 2

Shri Amrik Singh A.Yr.2004-05 AR about the dates of hearing before the CIT(A). The reasons for non appearance have thus been explained by the assessee.

7.

After considering the reasons given in the affidavit, we are satisfied that there was a reasonable cause for non appearance of the assesse before CIT(A). We also find that the CIT(A) has not decided the appeal of the Assessee on merits. In these circumstances we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of CIT(A) and remand the issues raised by the assessee before CIT(A) on merits for consideration afresh by CIT(A). The CIT(A) will afford opportunity of being heard to the assessee before deciding the appeal. For statistical purposes the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed.

8.

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Court on 11.05.2016.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →