AISWARYA ART CREATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-14(1), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1700/HYD/2018Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 June 2021AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s notice was not properly served on the assessee. Therefore, the case was restored to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was rejected ex-parte due to a delay in filing. The CIT(A)'s order was passed without condoning the delay and without proper service of notice on the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in rejecting the appeal ex-parte without proper service of notice and without condoning the delay.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI S.S.GODARA & SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU

O R D E R PER S.S.GODARA, J.M. :

This assessee’s appeal for AY.2013-14 arises from the CIT(A)-6, Hyderabad’s order dated 02-01-2018 passed in case No.0139/2016-17/A3/CIT(A)-6, in proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, ‘the Act’]. Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

We notice at the outset that the CIT(A)’s lower appellate order; affirming the Assessing Officer’s action rejecting its books of account thereby estimating 4% of the gross receipts of Rs.48,45,67,056/- as taxable income in assessment order dt.29-03-2016 has been passed ex-parte and that too without condoning the alleged delay of 31 days in filing the lower appellate order.

3.

Learned departmental representative sought to invite our attention to CIT(A)’s order rejecting the assessee’s appeal on account of its delay in filing the appeal being not explained by pinpointing any “sufficient cause”.

4.

We find no merit in the instant argument per se since the corresponding CIT(A)’s lower appellate order hearing notice does not seem to have been actually served on the assessee prima-facie. We therefore deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant grievance back to the CIT(A) for his appropriate adjudication as per law within three effective opportunities of hearing.

5.

This assessee’s appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 25th June, 2021

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →