Income Tax

Dismissing appeal ex-parte by CIT(A) on very first date of hearing unjustified – ITAT

Dismissing appeal ex-parte by CIT(A) on very first date of hearing without giving proper opportunity to the assessee to prepare the case was unjustified – ITAT

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2906 (2019) (05) ITAT

The appeal by Assessee was directed against the Order of the CIT(A) whereby he had denied the adjournment sought and ex-parte dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

The CIT(A) had noted in the impugned order that the assessee has filed the appeal online. However, only Form-35 was available on the website of the Department but the impugned penalty order and copy of the demand notice was not available on record.

Notice was issued to the assessee for hearing of the appeal. The assessee through their Counsel filed an application requesting for adjournment because written submissions and paper book was under preparation and compilation. However, no Power of Attorney and other details had been produced.

The CIT(A) did not accept the request for adjournment and in the absence of assessee, dismissed the appeal of assessee.

Before the Tribunal, the assessee submitted that it was the first date of hearing of the appeal, on which, no adjournment had been granted to the assessee. Therefore, no proper opportunity of hearing of the appeal had been granted to him.

He further submitted that it was an appeal against the quantum assessment order. However, the CIT(A) wrongly mentioned in the impugned order that impugned penalty order was not available on the website of the department.

The assessee referred to electronic appeal filed with CIT(A), in which, details of the challan had been mentioned and in the annexures, copy of the demand along with order appealed, had been filed with the O/o. CIT(A).

The Tribunal noted that facts clearly showed that there was no fault attributable to the assessee in filing the relevant documents along with the appeal papers. The CIT(A) on the very first date of hearing of the appeal proceeded ex-parte without giving proper opportunity to the assessee to prepare the case. The request for adjournment in writing was made seeking only 20 days time.

The Tribunal opined that facts clearly showed that impugned order was wholly unjustified and was liable to be set aside.

Accordingly, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the appeal of assessee to the file of CIT(A) with direction to re-decide the appeal of assessee on merits strictly as per Law.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

AO took a reasonable stand that 25 kg written in WhatsApp chat was 25 lakh – ITAT

Assessing Officer had taken a reasonable stand that 25 kg written in WhatsApp chat/text message was 25 lakh - ITAT…

6 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Shareholders can’t be taxed for income from properties owned by the company – HC

Shareholders are only owners of the shares of the company therefore, income from properties earned by the company cannot be…

8 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Jurisdictional error in reassessment approval can’t be shielded by the law of limitation

When approval for reassessment was granted by unauthorised authority, such jurisdictional error cannot be shielded by the law of limitation…

11 hours ago
  • Income Tax

ITAT ought to remanded whole matter of bogus purchases instead of profit determination

ITAT on presumption of bogus purchases ought to have remanded case to AO to reconsider the whole matter instead of…

12 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Where proceedings u/s 153C barred by limitation, AO can’t invoke section 148 & 148A

Where proceedings u/s 153C are barred by limitation, AO can not reopen the case invoking section 148 and 148A of…

1 day ago
  • bankruptcy

Corporate guarantees executed by corporate debtor constitute “financial debt” under IBC

Corporate guarantees executed by the corporate debtor constitute “financial debt” under IBC and banks to be recognized as financial creditors…

1 day ago