ARIHANT STEEL EXPORTS,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD 19(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2573/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 October 2023AY 2012-133 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without deciding the issue on merits. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the matter was restored back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte without a decision on merits. The assessee claimed they did not receive the hearing notice for the second date, leading to their absence.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without deciding the appeal on merits, and if the matter should be remanded for a fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A‘ BENCH

For Appellant: Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi
For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha
Hearing: 30/10/2023Pronounced: 30/10/2023

आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against order dated 30/05/2023 passed by NFAC, Delhi for the quantum of assessment passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 263 for the A.Y.2012-13.

2.

At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ld. CIT (A) has passed exparte order without deciding the issue on merits. In this case, the appeal was migrated to NFAC and on the first occasion assessee had sought for M/s. Arihant Steel Exports adjournment and on the next date, the notice of hearing could not be received and therefore, assessee was not aware of date intimated by the ld. CIT(A). Further, ld. CIT (A) has not decided the issue on merits, therefore, he submitted that in the interest of justice, matter should be restored back to the file of the ld. CIT (A) to be decided afresh.

3.

Ld. DR also does not have any objection as the appeal has not been decided on merits.

4.

In view of the aforesaid fact that ld. CIT (A) has decided the appeal exparte without going to the merits of the case, therefore, in the interest of justice, matter is restored back to the file of the ld. CIT (A) to be decided afresh and in accordance with the law after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to comply with the notices to substantiate its case.

5.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 30th October, 2023.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →