ASHOK KUMAR JAISWAL,SAS NAGAR vs. ITO, WARD 6(4), MOHALI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the assessee deserved another opportunity to present their case. The matter was set aside to the CIT(A) to be decided afresh after providing a reasonable opportunity.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) for non-prosecution. The assessee claimed that notices were issued during the COVID period and subsequent adjournment requests were not properly considered.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH BENCHES, “SMC” CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM
Order
PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM:
This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) ADDL/JCIT (A)-10, Mumbai dt. 23/02/2024 pertaining to Assessment Year 2012-13.
During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of non- prosecution. In this regard it was submitted that the first two notices were issued during COVID period which could not be responded due to nationwide lockdown. Regarding the third notice dt. 09/02/2024, it was submitted that the assessee moved an adjournment application seeking time to collect the necessary information and documentation and immediately thereafter, another notice dt. 16/02/2024 was issued against which the assessee again moved an adjournment application. However, without adjourning the matter any further and allowing the necessary opportunity to the assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) went ahead and decided the matter ex-parte qua the assessee. It was submitted that assessee be provided an opportunity to represent his case before the Ld. CIT(A) and the matter may accordingly be set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A).
In his rival submissions, the Ld. Sr. DR supported the orders of the authorities below and submitted that necessary opportunities were provided to the assessee and the assessee was not diligent about prosecuting its appeal leading to the passing of the ex- parte order. At the same time, it was fairly submitted that the Revenue has no objection where the matter is set-aside to the file of the ld CIT(A) to decide the same on merits of the case.
After hearing both the parties and considering the material available on the record, I believe that the assessee deserve one more opportunity to represent its case and I deem it appropriate to set aside the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh as per law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 5. In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Sutha vs. The State Tax Officer(Inspection-3)Madras · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S. Sikka Motors PVT LTD vs. Union Of INDIA & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shri Yaras Suresh Babu Prabhu Kumar vs. The Union Of INDIATelangana · 27 Oct 2026
- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026