Muslim Ali, Guwahati V. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Guwahati

ITA 226/GTY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8510 (ITAT-GUWAHATI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 1 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-07-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 21-05-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Reasonable cause
• Section: 68; 250

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL GAUHATI BENCH VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं.य / ITA No.226/GAU/2019 Assessment Year:2015-16 Muslim Ali House No. 29, Sundarbari, Jalukbari, Guwahati-781014 बनाम / V/s . The ACIT, Circle-1, Aaykar Bhawan, G.S Road, Christian Basti, Guwahati- 781005 PAN: AFEPA8030M अपीलाथ /Appellant .. यथ /Respondent अपीलाथ क ओर से/By Appellant Shri Krishna Pd. Sharma, FCA, Ld. AR यथ क ओर से/By Respondent Shri P.S Thuingaleng, ACIT Ld.SR-DR स ु नवाई क तार ख/Date of Hearing 07-07-2022 घोषणा क तार ख/ Date of Pronouncement 11-07-2022 आदेश /O R D E R PER MANISH BORAD, AM. The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 22-03-2019 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], Guwahati-1, Guwahati [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 9hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1. For that the Learned CITCA) was not justified in dismissing the appeal passing an ex-parte order without providing effective opportunity to the appellant to present his case which is violative ITA No.226/Gau/2019 AY 2015-16 Muslim Ali . Page 2 of the principal of natural justice and without going into the merits of the grounds of appeal which is against the provisions of law. 2. For that the Learned Commissioner of Income C Appeal) erred in law as well as facts in not allowing the ground of appeal against the addition of Rs 1,20,27,788/- made under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act 1961. 3 For that the Learned Commissioner of Income (Appeal) erred in law as well as facts in not allowing the ground of appeal against the disallowance of Rs 49,184/- being bank penal interest charges, disregarding the fact that it is not in the nature of any offence or expenses prohibited by any law; 4. For that the Learned CIT (A), once having dismissed the appeal, was functus officio and therefore was not justified in delving into the assessment order and in issuing directions to the Assessing officer to disturb the assessments relating to other years. To such extent, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is liable to be quashed. 5. For the Appellant craves leave to add, to modify or delete any of these grounds of appeal or before the hearing of the appeal. 3. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the impugned order is ex parte . The assessee did not receive any notice of hearing and therefore, effective hearing could not be done. The assessee could not file any submissions in support of his ground(s). A request was made to restore the issues raised in the instant appeal to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. 4. The Ld. Departmental Representative was fair enough to not to oppose this request of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. 5. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. We find that the impugned order is ex parte. The assessee did not get fair opportunity to contend the ld. CIT(A) and to file any submissions in support of his grounds. We, therefore, in the interest of justice and being fair to both the parties restore all the issues raised in the instant appeal to the Ld. CIT(A) for afresh adjudication after affording assessee reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to remain vigilant to the notice ITA No.226/Gau/2019 AY 2015-16 Muslim Ali . Page 3 of hearing and should not take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced on 11/07/2022 Sd/- Sd/- (SONJOY SARMA) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated 11-07-2022 Kolkata/ कोलकाता **PP/Sr.PS दनांकः-11/07/2022 आदेश क त ल प अ े षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant-Muslim Ali, House No. 29, Sundarbari, Jalukbari, Guwahati-781014. 2. यथ /Respondent-The ACIT, Circle-1, Aaykar Bhawan, G.S Road, Christian Basti, Guwahati-781005 3. संबं धत आयकर आय ु त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आय ु त- अपील / CIT (A) 5. वभागीय त न ध, आयकर अपील य अ धकरण कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Guwahati 6. गाड फाइल / Guard file. /True Copy/ By order/आदेश से, सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील य अ धकरण,कोलकाता ।