2018 (4) TMI 1531 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal stresses fair hearing, remands case for notice discrepancies, emphasizes natural justice.

The Tribunal remanded the case to the CIT(A) due to discrepancies in the service and adequacy of notices, emphasizing the importance of providing a fair ... Assessment ex-parte without affording due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee - no notice for hearing was served upon the assessee - Held that:- It is not clear that when the Postal Authorities returned the notice with the postal remark “No such firm at the given address” and “Left” then how the notice was served by Speed Post on the same address. It is also noticed that the time given by the ld. CIT(A) for hearing was not sufficient i.e. notice issued on 13.09.2017 for hearing on 18.09.2017. In the present case, nothing was brought on record that the notice for hearing was served upon the assessee. It is well settled that nobody should be condemned unheard as per the maxim “audi alteram partem”. We, therefore, considering the totality of the facts of the case, deem it appropriate to remand the case to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh in accordance with law after providing due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to cooperate and not seek unwarranted or unreasonable adjournment. Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes Issues:- Appeal challenging disallowances- Confirmation of order without hearing- Assessment framed ex-parte- Non-cooperation of assessee- Adequacy of notice for hearingAnalysis:The appeal filed by the assessee challenged various disallowances made by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the CIT(A), with the main grievance being the confirmation of the order without affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The facts revealed that the assessment was framed ex-parte at a higher income due to the assessee's non-compliance with the directions of the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) decided the appeal ex-parte citing lack of cooperation from the appellant and non-compliance with notices. The appellant contended that no due opportunity of being heard was provided by the CIT(A) or the Assessing Officer.Upon careful consideration, it was observed that the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) had issued notices for hearings, but there were discrepancies in the service and adequacy of the notices. The CIT(A) fixed hearings without clear evidence of proper service, raising concerns about the fairness of the proceedings. The principle of natural justice, 'audi alteram partem,' was emphasized, highlighting the importance of providing a fair hearing to all parties involved. Consequently, the Tribunal deemed it appropriate to remand the case to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision, emphasizing the need for a reasonable opportunity of being heard for the assessee and directing cooperation without seeking unwarranted adjournments.The Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes and dismissed the Stay Application as infructuous, emphasizing the importance of procedural fairness and the right to be heard in tax proceedings. The judgment underscored the significance of providing adequate notice and opportunities for parties to present their case, ensuring a just and transparent adjudication process in line with legal principles and natural justice.