What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee was denied an opportunity of being heard, violating principles of natural justice. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte due to alleged non-compliance with notices. The assessee claimed not to have received notices on their provided email address.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order passed ex-parte without ensuring proper service of notice and opportunity of hearing to the assessee is valid. The core issue is the violation of principles of natural justice.

Shri Jai Bhagwan, Mansa vs DCIT | ITAT Amritsar 2023

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR

Before: DR. M. L. MEENA & SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE

For Respondent: Smt. Ratinder Kaur, Sr. DR

Hearing: 06.11.2023Pronounced: 10.11.2023

order of the ld. CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 21.07.2023 in respect of Assessment Year: 2016-17 challenging

Jai Bhagwan v. Dy. CIT therein the impugned order passed ex-parte qua the assessee on account of principles of natural justice.

At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that he has not received any notices on the email address given on Form No. 35 (APB pg. 2) and that the ld. CIT(A) has merely stated that the appellant did not comply to the notices issued till the date of passing the impugned order.

The ld. CIT(A) has observed that the appellant was non-compliant and no material and details in support of the grounds of appeal were submitted and accordingly, he has taken the decision without taking rebuttal of the ground raised by assessee on the record by issuing of any show cause notice while taking any adverse decision against him. The ld. counsel prayed that the matter may be remanded back to the ld. CIT(A) to grant fresh opportunity of being heard and decide the appeal on merits of the case.

Per contra, the ld. DR has no objection to the request of the assessee in view of natural justice.

Heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and the impugned order. Admittedly, the ld. CIT(A) has passed the order ex-parte qua the assessee by merely stating that the assessee was non-compliant

Jai Bhagwan v. Dy. CIT to the notice of hearing issued and passed the order endorsing the finding of the Assessing Officer. It is noted that the ld. CIT(A) has mentioned the fact of the date of issue of notice of hearing but he has not mentioned the fact of services of the notice of hearing upon the assessee. Thus, in our view, the assessee has been denied the opportunity of being heard, in violation of the principles of natural justice. We, therefore, consider it deem fit to remand back the matter to the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the appeal on merits of the case after granting adequate opportunity of being heard to the appellant assessee by issuing notices on the email address given in Form No. 35 of the appeal memo filed before him. At the same time, the appellant is directed to co-operate in the fresh proceedings before the ld. CIT(A) by updating the change of email address, if any. Accordingly, the matter is restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A).

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

SHRI JAI BHAGWAN,MANSA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, BATHINDA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments