INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 250(2)

Appeal [CIT(A)] - Ex-parte order - Assessee remained absent on more than one occasion - Appeal decided on merits

Assessee, being dissatisfied with the order passed by the AO, under section 11 preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). It appeared that despite number of notices issued by the CIT(A) to the assessee for the hearing of the appeal, the assessee failed to remain present and make his submissions. In such circumstances, the CIT(A) proceeded to decide the appeal on merits in the absence of the assessee. The CIT(A), ultimately, dismissed the appeal, thereby confirming the addition made by the AO.Held: If an order was passed by the CIT(A) on merits, despite the fact that the assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A) at the time of the final hearing of the appeal, the order passed by the CIT(A) cannot be termed as ex-parte. An order having been passed by the CIT(A) after service of notices on the assessee, there is no question of failure of natural justice. It cannot be said that the assessee was not given an opportunity of hearing. The order of the CIT(A) was more than clear. On more than one occasion, the assessee remained absent before the CIT(A), and in such circumstances, the CIT(A) had no option but to look into the records and decide the appeal on its own merit.

REFERRED :

FAVOUR : Against the assessee.

A.Y. : 2011-12

INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 254(1)

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT