Shyamarani Manna Maity vs. I.T.O. Ward-26(4), Kolkata

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Shyamarani Manna Maity, filed an appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee contended that the order was erroneous and was passed ex parte without providing an effective opportunity for hearing. The assessee claimed that she did not receive the notices sent by the Commissioner because the email ID provided was not accessed. The Departmental Representative opposed the submission, stating that multiple notices were issued to the assessee on various dates, but no response or appearance was made on behalf of the assessee. The Tribunal considered the submissions and the material available on record and found that it was appropriate to grant the assessee one more opportunity to represent her case before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was erroneous and bad in law?
• 2. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in passing the order ex parte without allowing effective opportunity of hearing?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Bornstar Nongdhar vs. Income tax Officer, Ward-1, Shillong

  Guwahati bench

• Kishorepur Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Limited vs. ITO, Ward-41(3), Nadia

  Kolkata bench

• Educomp Professional Education Limited vs DCIT Circle-1(1), Gurgaon

  Delhi bench

• Eastern Auto Investo Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT, Circle-3(1), Kolkata

  Kolkata bench

• Tanjore Chandrakantam Balakrishnan Ravi Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Trichy

• Royal Medical Trust vs. The Income Tax Officer

  Cochin bench