SHIVAM NIRANJANLAL PODDAR,GANDHIDHAM V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, GANDHIDHAM

ITA 294/RJT/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Shivam Niranjanlal Poddar, the appellant, contesting an order from the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) at the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which was based on an assessment order by the Assessing Officer under sections 143(3) r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant argued that the CIT(A) had not granted an adjournment requested, leading to an ex parte order that violated the principles of natural justice. The Departmental Representative did not object to the matter being remitted back to the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant's contention and restored the matter for fresh adjudication, instructing the Assessing Officer to pass a speaking order after providing a fair hearing to the appellant.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 470592 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 30-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 06-05-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHIMANYU SINGH YADAV; LD.
• Assessee Lawyers: CHETAN AGARWAL; LD
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOTBENCH (SMC), RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.294/RJT/2024 Assessment Year: (2020-21) (Hybrid Hearing) SHIVAM NIRANJANLAL PODDAR Plot no. 62, Sector – 1, Gandhidham, Gujarat - 370201 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Gandhidham, Gujarat. èथायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AIYPP2374E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. A.R. Respondent by Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR Date of Hearing 30/10/2024 Date of Pronouncement 29/11/2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2020-21, is directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short “the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC”], dated 16.10.2023,which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by Assessing Officer (in short ‘the AO”) u/s 143(3)r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 2. At the outset itself, Learned Counsel for the assessee assailed the impugned order passed by ld. CIT(A), contending that assessee filed adjournment letter before the ld. CIT(A), however the ld. CIT(A) did not grant adjournment. Therefore, the assessee could not represent his case before ld. CIT(A) and the order being an ex parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of principle of natural justice. Had the ld. CIT(A) granted an adjournment, the assessee would have filed documents, evidences and written submission before ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits. Besides, certain documents and evidences are yet to be filed before the assessing officer. Therefore, ld. Counsel contended that another opportunity to plead his case before the Assessing Officer may be granted to the assessee. 3. On the other hand, Learned Departmental Representative (ld. DR) for the Revenue did not have any objection if the matter is remitted back to the file of Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. 4. I have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submissions put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the facts of the case including the findings of the ld. CIT(A) and other material brought on record. I note that assessee could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A). I also note that Ld. CIT(A) has not passed the order as per the mandate of provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. That is, ld. CIT(A) did not pass order on merit based on the submission of the assessee, which would have been submitted by him provided ld. CIT(A) had granted the adjournment. Hence, I am of the view that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to plead his case before the Assessing Officer. I note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, I restore the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest her stand forthwith. Therefore, I deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. The assessee is also directed to be more vigilant in future and not to take any adjournment without any valid reason. The assessee is also directed to submit all the documents, evidences and replies as soon as possible without any further delay. In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes only. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Sd/- (Dr. A.L. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Rajkot *Ranjan Ǒदनांक/ Date: 29/11 /2024 TRUE COPY Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR/AR, ITAT, Rajkot 6. Guard File By Order Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot "