SMT. KESAVACHANDRARAJ SUBBULAKSHMI, MADURAI V. ITO, NCW - 3 (4), MADURAI

ITA 547/CHNY/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9069 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-11-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 15-03-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ (एस एम सी) ᭠यायपीठ, चे᳖ई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ (SMC) BENCH, CHENNAI Įी महावीर ͧसंह, उपाÚय¢ के समᭃ BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.: 547/CHNY/2020 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Smt. Kesavachandraraj Subbulakshmi, 3/321, Kavimani Street, Indian Bank Colony, Narayanapuram, Madurai – 625 014. PAN : ACYPS 0708H v. The Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward – 3(4), CR Building No. 2, VP Rathinasamy Nadar Rd, Bibikulam, Madurai – 625 002. (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) अपीलाथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Appellant by : None ᮧ᭜यथᱮ कᳱ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri B. Sajive, JCIT स ु नवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing : 09.11.2021 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 09.11.2021 आदेश /O R D E R This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Madurai, in ITA No.205/2016-17 vide order dated 31.01.2020. The Assessment was framed by Income Tax Officer, Non-Corporate Ward 3(4), Madurai for the assessment year 2014-15 vide order dated 01.12.2016 U/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’). 2 I.T.A. No.547/Chny/2020 2. At the outset, it is noticed that none present for assessee, when the appeal was called for hearing. However, going through the facts, I decided to decide the appeal after hearing ld. senior Department Representative. 3. It is noticed from the order of CIT(A) that CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of assessee ex-parte without discussing the issue on merits. When this fact was confronted to ld. senior Department Representative, he fairly conceded the position and stated that matter can be remanded back to the file of the CIT(A). 4. After hearing ld. senior DR and going through the case records, I’m of the view that unless the statute authorizes a quasi judicial authority to dismiss the appeal for default expressly or by inevitable implication, the appellate authority has to decide the appeal and not to dismiss it for default. Probably, appellate authority has to decide the appeal on merits by a speaking order. Where an appeal has been disposed off ex-parte and without speaking order, ex-parte order is not maintainable. Hence, the order passed by the CIT(A) is not maintainable and accordingly the same is reversed. However, the order of CIT(A) 3 I.T.A. No.547/Chny/2020 is set aside but matter is remanded back to his file for fresh adjudication after allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 9 th November, 2021 at Chennai. Sd/- (महावीर ͧसंह ) (Mahavir Singh) उपाÚय¢ /Vice President चे᳖ई/Chennai, ᳰदनांक/Dated, the 9 th November, 2021 RSR आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent 3. आयकर आयुᲦ (अपील)/CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयुᲦ /CIT 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध/DR 6. गाडᭅ फाईल/GF.