What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that both the AO and CIT(A) passed orders ex-parte without adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Therefore, the case was remanded back to the AO for a fresh assessment.

The assessee, a farmer, appealed an ex-parte assessment order passed under Section 144. The CIT(A) also passed an ex-parte order without granting a proper opportunity to be heard.

What were the issues?

Whether the lower authorities violated principles of natural justice by passing ex-parte orders without affording proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Shri Jaswinder Singh, Tarn Taran vs ITO | ITAT Amritsar 2023

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR

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

For Respondent: Dr. Vedanshu Tripathi, Sr. DR

Hearing: 24.05.2023Pronounced: 30.05.2023

order of the Ld. CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 14.12.2022 in respect of AY 2011-12 challenging therein the order

Jaswinder Singh v. ITO passed ex-parte qua the assessee u/s 250 without giving proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant.

At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that the NFAC has erred on facts and law in confirming the finding of the AO given in the assessment order passed u/s 144 of the Act ex-parte qua the assessee without giving proper opportunity of being heard. He contended that the appellant is a poor agriculturist having no other sources of income than the agriculture. The ld. CIT(A) has mentioned vide para 9 of the impugned order that the appellant was provided one opportunity after the other which led to an ex-parte order in the end. Thereby confirming the ex- parte order passed by the AO u/s 144 is being passed in violation of principles of natural justice.

Per contra, the ld. DR stands by the impugned order.

Having heard the rival contention, perusal of record and the impugned order, we find that both the lower authorities have passed the order ex-parte qua the assessee. It is evident from the impugned order that the ld. CIT(A) has specifically mentioned that the appellant was provided one opportunity after the other which led to an ex-parte order in the end without deciding the appeal on merits of the case against the ex-parte

Jaswinder Singh v. ITO assessment order u/s 144. It is noted that the ld. CIT(A) has mentioned the factum of the issue of notices to the assessee but he has not mentioned the factum of service of notice upon the assessee which makes it apparently clear that the appellant assessee has not been served the notices issued. Meaning thereby that adequate opportunity of being heard has not been granted by either of the authorities below. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to be remanded back to the file of the AO to pass de novo assessment after granting sufficient opportunity of being heard to the appellant assessee. The assessee is directed to co- operate in the fresh proceedings before the Assessing Officer.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 30.05.2023

SHRI JASWINDER SINGH,TARN TARAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 (2), AMRITSAR

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