VINOD KESHARDEO BAJORIYA,YAVATMAL V. ITO WARD 1, YAVATMAL

ITA 513/NAG/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Vinod Keshardeo Bajoriya against an ex-parte order from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which pertained to the assessment year 2017-18. The Tribunal noted a procedural delay in filing the appeal, which was subsequently condoned based on an affidavit provided by the assessee. The core issue was the ex-parte nature of the previous ruling, where the assessee was allegedly not given adequate opportunity to present his case. The Tribunal, after considering the submissions and the affidavit, decided to remit the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing, ensuring that the assessee's right to a fair hearing was upheld.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 24462 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHAY Y. MARATHE
• Assessee Lawyers: ABHAY AGRAWAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Reasonable cause; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER SMC MATTER ITA no.513/Nag./2024 (Assessment Year : 2017–18) Vinod Keshardeo Bajoriya Bori Arab, Taluka Darwha 445 001 PAN – ABDPB8776A ……………. Appellant v/s Income Tax Officer Ward–1, Yavatmal ……………. Respondent Assessee by : Shri Abhay Agrawal Revenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe Date of Hearing – 21/01/2025 Date of Order – 27/01/2025 O R D E R The appeal the assessee is against the impugned order dated 06/06/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2017–18. 2. During the course of hearing, the Registry has pointed out a delay of 47 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. While going through the record available before us, I find that the assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the sufficient cause for condoning the delay in filing the present appeal and thus the learned A.R. prayed before me for condoning the delay in filing the present appeal. The original affidavit is placed on record. 2 Vinod Keshardeo Bajoriya ITA no.513/Nag./2024 3. After considering the submissions of the learned Authorised Representative and averments made in the affidavit, I am of the opinion that the assessee is prevented in filing the appeal belatedly and I am satisfied that the delay in filing the appeal is due to reasonable cause. Consequently, I condone the delay of 47 days in filing the present appeal and admit the same for adjudication on merit. 4. At the time of hearing, the learned Authorised Representative for the assessee submitted before me that the learned CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order and prayed that one opportunity may be granted by restoring the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) to enable the assessee to substantiate its case before the learned CIT(A). 2. On the other hand, the learned D.R. submitted that despite the learned CIT(A) provided sufficient opportunities to the assessee, however, the assessee did not appear before the learned CIT(A) and not furnished relevant details. He strongly supported the orders passed by the learned CIT(A). 3. I have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. I find that though the learned CIT(A) granted opportunities to the assessee to substantiate its case, ultimately, the order passed by him is an ex-parte order. Therefore, I am of the opinion that by following the principles of natural justice, one opportunity should be given to the assessee to substantiate the case before the learned CIT(A). In view of the above, the order passed by the learned CIT(A) is set aside and remit back the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) and direct 3 Vinod Keshardeo Bajoriya ITA no.513/Nag./2024 him to adjudicate the matter afresh on merit and in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the assessee in this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes. 4. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 27/01/2025 NAGPUR, DATED: 27/01/2025 Sd/- V. DURGA RAO JUDICIAL MEMBER Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Nagpur; and (5) Guard file. True Copy By Order Pradeep J. Chowdhury Sr. Private Secretary Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur "