The Tax Publishers2021 TaxPub(DT) 0487 (Mum-Trib)

INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Section 250(6)

Where CIT(A) decided the controversy in absence of the assessee without giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and a proper and reasonable opportunity was required to be given to the assessee before the deciding the matter of controversy in accordance with law, therefore, matter was remanded back to CIT(A) to decide the matter afresh by giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee in accordance with law.

Appeal to CIT(A) - Penalty under section 271(l)(c) - CIT(A) decided the controversy without giving an opportunity of being heard to assessee -

Assessee filed its return of income and thereafter, he filed the revised return of income declaring total income to the tune of Rs. 3,34,36,493 under the normal provisions and declared book profit under section 115JB at Rs. 98,57,631. Based on the direction of DRP, the final order under section 143(3) read with section 144C(13) was passed AO took total income of Rs. 4,80,19,930 under the normal provisions and book profit under section 115JB. Accordingly, AO invoked the provisions under section 271(1)(c). CIT(A) confirmed the penalty. Held: CIT(A) decided the matter of controversy in absence of the assessee without giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is against the principle of natural justice. A proper and reasonable opportunity was required to be given to the assessee before deciding the matter of controversy in accordance with law. Order of CIT(A) was not liable to be sustainable in the eyes of law, therefore, matter was remanded back to CIT(A) to decide the matter afresh by giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee in accordance with law.

REFERRED :

FAVOUR : In assessee's favour.

A.Y. : 2006-07 & 2007-08



IN THE ITAT, MUMBAI BENCH

SUBSCRIBE TaxPublishers.inSUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT