P.RAMESH BABU,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 601/CHNY/2015Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 May 2015AY 2006-074 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) decided the issues ex parte without giving a proper opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, the case was remitted back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was decided ex parte by the CIT(A) because no one appeared on behalf of the assessee. The assessee requested another opportunity to argue the case.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in disposing of the appeal in haste and in a summary manner without providing a proper opportunity to the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI & SHRI V. DURGA RAO

For Respondent: Shri P. Radhakrishnan, JCIT
Hearing: 26.05.2015Pronounced: 26.05.2015

आदेश /O R D E R

PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

1.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) dated 2.1.2015.

2.

The assessee has raised the following grounds in this appeal:

2 - - ITA 601/15

“2. The Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) erred in disposing off the appeal in haste when the representative as well as the appellant appeared before him not only in this case but in many other cases of this group.

3.

The Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) erred in disposing off the appeal in a summary manner without adverting to the facts of the case and the objections contained in the grounds of appeal.”

3. Before the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals), none appeared, on behalf of the assessee to represent his case. Hence, the appeal was decided ex parte, by the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals).

4.

Before us, the assessee pleaded that one more opportunity may be given to the assessee to argue his case in the interest of justice.

5.

On the other hand, the ld. DR submitted that effective opportunity has been given to the assessee, which was not availed by him. Hence, the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) decided the issue on merit and no fresh opportunity has been given to the assessee.

3 - - ITA 601/15

6.

After hearing both sides, we find that in this case, admittedly, the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) decided the issues in dispute ex parte without giving proper opportunity to the assessee. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice, one more opportunity may be given to the assessee. Therefore, we remit the case to the file of the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) to decide the entire issues afresh after providing one more opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is directed to co-operate with the Department and produce necessary evidence to support his case.

7.

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

Order pronounced on Tuesday, the 26th of May, 2015 at Chennai.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →