SH. VIJAY KUMAR THROUGH LEGAL HEIR SH. RAKESH KUMAR,MUKTSAR vs. DCIT, CC-2, LUDHIANA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that both the assessment order and the appellate order were passed ex-parte. Considering the principles of natural justice, the Tribunal decided to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on merits.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was filed against an ex-parte order of the CIT(A). The assessee's counsel argued that the CIT(A) did not decide the appeal on merits, requesting a remand for fresh adjudication.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in deciding the appeal ex-parte without considering the merits, and if the assessment order was passed without jurisdiction.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI A.D. JAIN & DR KRINWANT SAHAY
Order Per Dr. Krinwant Sahay, A.M.: The appeal in this case has been filed by the Assessee against the order dated 19.07.2023 of the Ld. CIT(A)-5, Ludhiana for the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-
1. That order passed u/s 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ludhiana is against law and facts on the file in as such as he was not justified to decide the appeal ex-parte.
518/Chd/2023 Sh. Vijay Kumar. 2 2. That the Learned CIT(A) was not justified in not deciding the appeal on merits.
That the order passed by the Learned Assessing Officer is non-est and bad in law in as much as the proceedings have not been conducted in the manner prescribed by the departmental instructions from time to time which are mandatory for compliance by the Learned Authorities particularly with respect to mentioning of Document Identification Number (DIN).
That assessment framed by the Learned Assessing Officer is without jurisdiction and thus, null and void.”
3. During the proceedings before us, at the very outset, the Counsel of the Assessee brought it to notice of the Bench that the assessment order in this appeal has been passed ex-parte and the appellate order has also been passed ex-parte. The Counsel of the assessee also contended that while passing the appellate order, the Ld. CIT(A) has not given his findings on merit, therefore, the Counsel of the Assessee requested to the Bench that this case may be remanded back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merit.
4. The Ld. DR argued that ex-parte order of both authorities below, the A.O. and the Ld. CIT(A) shows that the assessee has not been co- operating with the Department, however, keeping in view the natural justice, this appeal may be remanded back to the file of Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, this appeal i.e. is being remanded back to the file of Ld. CIT(A), to be decided afresh on merit, in accordance with law, on affording due and adequate opportunity of 518/Chd/2023 Sh. Vijay Kumar. 3 hearing to the Assessee. The Assessee, no doubt, shall cooperate in the fresh proceedings before the CIT(A). All pleas available under the law shall remain so available to the assessee. Ordered accordingly.
In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 03.06.2024.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Priya, Townhall Road, Cuttack vs. Superintendent Cuttack- I Range, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
