What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee could not participate in the proceedings before the CIT(A) due to non-receipt of notice. Therefore, to ensure substantial justice, the impugned order was set aside.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte because the notice was not received due to a change in address. The assessee provided an affidavit confirming the address shift and requested the matter be set aside.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in deciding the appeal ex-parte without the assessee being able to participate due to non-receipt of notice.

M/S Angel Finvest Pvt. Ltd… vs DCIT | ITAT Chandigarh 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCHES ‘A’, CHANDIGARH

Before: MS. DIVA SINGH & SHRI B.R.R.KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CA

For Respondent: Dr. Gulshan Raj,CIT-DR

Hearing: 06.03.2018Pronounced: 27.03.2018

PER DIVA SINGH, JM

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 22/12/2016 of CIT(A)-5, Ludhiana pertaining to 2012–13 assessment year on the following grounds : 1. That order passed u/s 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-S, Ludhiana is against law and facts on the file in as much he was not justified to decide the appeal ex-parte. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) gravely erred in not deciding the appeal on merits as per provisions of Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 2. The Ld. AR inviting attention to the impugned order submitted that the order has been passed ex-parte wherein the assessee could not participate before the CIT(A) on account of the fact that the notice had not been received by the assessee. Inviting attention to the affidavit filed, it was his submission that in fact the assessee was in the process of shifting his address and had shifted to 178 Col. Gurdial Singh Road, Civil Lines, Ludhiana 141001 (Punjab) w.e.f. 15/01/2017. Relying upon the affidavit of the assessee, it was his submission that the impugned order may be set-aside to the file of the CIT(A) on his oral undertaking. 3. The Ld. CIT-DR drew attention to the fact that the assessee refused to accept a intimations for date of hearing before the CIT(A) as noted in paragraph 2 of the said order. On a perusal of the said order it

ITA 240/CHD/2017 A.Y. 2012-13 Page 2 of 2

is seen that the address given therein is “B–27, Moti Nagar, Ludhiana” and considering the Memo of Appeal filed by the assessee before the ITAT wherein in column No. 10 the assessee has given the aforesaid address i.e. “M/s Angel Finvest Pvt. Ltd., 178, Col. Gurdial Singh Road, Civil Lines, Ludhiana, Pin-141001 (Punjab)” which is appearing in the affidavit filed. In the circumstances, the ld. CIT-DR considering the record had no objection if the prayer of the assessee is accepted.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. Taking into consideration the facts of the present case as have been brought out herein above, we find that in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case the assessee could not participate in the proceedings before the CIT(A) on account of the reason that due to shifting of the address, the notice sent could not be received. Accordingly, in the interests of substantial justice in order to afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee, the impugned order is set aside back to the file of the CIT(A) with the direction to pass a speaking order in accordance with law after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. While so directing, it is made clear that the assessee shall participate in the proceedings fully and fairly and not abuse the trust reposed as in the eventuality of abuse of the same the CIT(A) would be at liberty to pass an order on the basis of material available on record. Said order was pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing itself. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 27.03. 2018.

Sd/- Sd/- (Dr.B.R.KUMAR) (DIVA SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

‘Poonam’ Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR Asstt. Registrar ITAT,Chandigarh.

M/S ANGEL FINVEST PVT. LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, LUDHIANA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments