Shri Alexender Fernandes, Nagoa V. DCIT, Intl. Taxation, Circle - 2(2), Bengaluru

ITA 36/PAN/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Alexander Fernandes, the appellant, contesting an ex parte order from the CIT(A)-12, Bengaluru, regarding the assessment year 2017-18. The primary contention was the alleged violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically the lack of an adequate opportunity for cross-examination of evidence used against the assessee. The Tribunal, after considering the submissions and the absence of the assessee's appearance, decided to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remand the case for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 136945 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-09-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 16-05-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI (AT e-Court, PUNE) BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.36/PAN/2022 नधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Alexander Fernandes, H.No.22/1, Fudlem Vaddo, Nagao, Goa – 403 518 PAN : ABCPF1939L Vs. DCIT, International Taxation, Circle-2(2), Bengaluru Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : This appeal by the assessee arises out of the ex parte order dated 25-03-2022 passed by the CIT(A)-12, Bengaluru u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) in relation to the assessment year 2017-18. 2. There is no appearance from the side of the assessee despite notice. We have heard the ld. DR and gone through the relevant material on record. We, therefore, proceed to dispose of the appeal on merits. Assessee by None Revenue by Smt. Ashwini Hosmani Date of hearing 11-09-2023 Date of pronouncement 13-09-2023 ITA No.36/PAN/2022 Alexander Fernandes 2 3. It is seen that the assessment order in this case was passed u/s.143(3) of the Act determining total income at Rs.82,51,183/-. The assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT(A) but remained unsuccessful. The assessee, vide grounds of appeal No.1 & 2, has contended that the ld. CIT(A) did not follow the principles of natural justice by not granting adequate opportunity of cross examination of the evidence which was used against the assessee. Considering the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered opinion that it would be just and fair if the impugned order is set-aside and the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the appeal afresh as per law after allowing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. We order accordingly. 4. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 13 th September, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- ( S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI) (R.S.SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; िदनांक Dated : 13 th September, 2023 सतीश ITA No.36/PAN/2022 Alexander Fernandes 3 आदेश की ितिलिप अ ेिषत/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant; 2. थ / The respondent 3. The Pr.CIT concerned 4. DR, ITAT, Panaji Bench, Panaji 5. गाड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune Date 1. Draft dictated on 11-09-2023 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 12-09-2023 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member JM 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. JM 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11. Date of dispatch of Order. *