M/S SURESH KUMAR, KATHUA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER , KATHUA

ITA 50/ASR/2023

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Sh. Suresh Kumar against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 28.09.2022, concerning the Assessment Year 2017-18. The primary contention was the violation of the principles of natural justice, as the CIT(A) had passed the order ex-parte without providing an adequate opportunity for the assessee to be heard. The tribunal, after hearing the arguments and considering the principles of natural justice, decided to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 114451 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-05-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 21-05-2023
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 30-01-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (VIRTUAT COURT) BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 50/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sh. Suresh Kumar S/o Sh. Mohan Lal Nagrota Gujroo, Kandharnoo Billawar, Kathua 184 205, Jammu & Kashmir [PAN: CCBPK 9255J] (Appellant) V. Income Tax Officer, Kathua (Respondent) Appellant by Sh. Gourav Arora, Adv. Respondent by Dr. Vedanshu Tripathi, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 22.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 25.05.2023 ORDER Per Dr. M. L. Meena, AM: This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 28.09.2022 in respect of Assessment Year 2017-18 where the assessee I.T.A. No. 50/Asr/2023 Suresh Kumar v. ITO 2 has challenged the impugned order in violation of principles of natural justice. 2. At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee has requested for condonation of short delay of 65 days in filing the appeal. Delay condoned and appeal admitted on merits. The counsel argued that the ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in passing the impugned order ex-parte qua the assessee without granting an adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and pass the ex-parte order without deciding the appeal on the merits of the case. He prayed that the order may be remanded back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide afresh after granting sufficient opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 3. The ld. DR although stand by the impugned order but he has no objection to the request of the appellant on account of principles of natural justice. 4. Having heard, both the sides and perusal of the impugned order, we found that the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order in summary manner mentioning that the non-compliance to the two notices issued shows that the appellant is not interested in pursuing the appeal. It is evident from the impugned order that the appellant-assessee has been I.T.A. No. 50/Asr/2023 Suresh Kumar v. ITO 3 denied an adequate opportunity of being heard while deciding its appeal ex-parte in summary manner. In our view, the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) is in gross violation of principles of natural justice, therefore, we deem it fit to remand back the case to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to pass the order afresh after granting an adequate opportunity of being heard to the appellant assessee on the merits of the case. The assessee is directed to co-operate in the appellate proceedings for the ld. CIT(A). 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 25.05.2023 Sd/- Sd/- (Anikesh Banerjee) (Dr. M. L. Meena) Judicial Member Accountant Member *GP/Sr./P.S.* Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4) The CIT (Appeals) (5) The DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By Order