Mohammed Amer Ul Haq Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Bangalore has set aside the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] and granted Mohammed Amer Ul Haq a fresh opportunity to present his case. The appeal, concerning the assessment year 2015-16, arose after the CIT(A) confirmed the Assessing Officer’s (AO) order due to the assessee’s failure to respond to multiple hearing notices. The assessee argued that the non-compliance was unintentional and resulted from non-receipt of email notices.
The assessee contended that the denial of a hearing violated the principles of natural justice. The Tribunal considered the plea and found that the lack of response was not willful or deliberate. The assessee assured full cooperation and compliance in fresh proceedings before the CIT(A). The Tribunal noted that tax adjudication must adhere to fairness and provide reasonable opportunities for the taxpayer to present their case.
The Departmental Representative (DR) argued in favor of upholding the CIT(A) order, stating that the assessee had been given multiple opportunities but failed to comply. However, ITAT observed that if procedural lapses prevented a fair hearing, the taxpayer should not be denied a chance to present relevant materials. ITAT reiterated that ensuring a fair hearing is a fundamental principle in tax adjudication.
