R.K.INFRA & ENGINEERING (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ADDL.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-3, HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2038/HYD/2018Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 September 2021AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeals to the file of the first appellate authority. The CIT(A) was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decide the appeals on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were decided ex-parte by the CIT(A). The assessee requested that the matters be restored to the CIT(A)'s file for a decision on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte decision of the CIT(A) was justified and if the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present their case on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271E,Section 271D

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “B”: HYDERABAD

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU

For Respondent: Shri D.J. Prabhakar Anand
Hearing: 15/09/2021Pronounced: 17/09/2021

O R D E R PER L.P. SAHU, A.M.: These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against CIT(A) – 3, Hyderabad’s order dated 10/07/2018 for AY 2013-14 involving proceedings u/s 271 E and 271D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 respectively; in short “the Act”.

2.

In the course of hearing, it was pointed out by the learned counsel of the assessee that the learned CIT(A) had decided the matters ex-parte. Therefore, it would be in the interest of justice, the matters may be restored to his file for deciding various grounds of appeal

on merits. The ld. AR undertook to produce all the relevant & 2038/Hyd/2018 RK Infra & Engineering (India) Pvt. Ltd., Hyd. Vs. ACIT Range 3,Hyd documents to substantiate his case before the CIT(A). The learned DR agreed with the aforesaid statement of the learned AR.

3. We have considered the facts of the case and the request made by the learned AR. We are of the view that interest of justice will be served if the matter is restored to the file of first appellate authority for deciding various grounds of appeal of the assessee on merits. Accordingly, the CIT(A) is directed to afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and thereafter decide the appeal on merits. We direct the assessee to appear before CIT(A) with all the relevant evidences; at his own risk and responsibility to be followed by three effective opportunities of hearing.

4. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open court on 17th September, 2021.

Sd/- Sd/- (S.S. GODARA) (L. P. SAHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 17th September, 2021. *gmv Copy to : 1 R.K Infra & Engineering (India) Pvt. Ltd., 1-2- 49/15, 1st floor, Nizampet road, Hydernagar, Kukatpally, Hyderabad – 500 072 2 ACIT, Range 3, Hyderabad. 3 CIT(A) – 3, Hyderabad. Pr. CIT – 3, Hyderabad 4 DR, ITAT, Hyderabad. 5 6 Guard File.

& 2038/Hyd/2018 RK Infra & Engineering (India) Pvt. Ltd., Hyd. Vs. ACIT Range 3,Hyd

S.No. Details Date 1 Draft dictated on 2 Draft placed before author Draft proposed & placed before the 3 Second Member Draft discussed/approved by Second 4 Member 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement 7 File sent to Bench Clerk Date on which the file goes to Head 8 Clerk 9 Date on which file goes to A.R. 10 Date of Dispatch of order

More judgments on Section 271E

All 968 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271E →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →