HARISH RAWTANI,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-14(1), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 878/HYD/2019Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 April 20214 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee could not be held wilfully absent due to a single default. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication with specific directions for hearing and evidence submission.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2009-10 was against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A). The assessee contended that the CIT(A) should have decided the appeal on merits regarding additions of Rs. 1,91,03,816/- and Rs. 53,37,800/-.

What were the issues?

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

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154

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

This assessee’s appeal for AY.2009-10 arises from the CIT(A)-6, Hyderabad’s order dated 05-03-2019 passed in case No.10295/2018-19/A2/CIT(A)-6, in proceedings u/s.154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, ‘the Act’].

:- 2 -: ITA No. 878/Hyd/2019

2.

The assessee has raised the following substantive grounds in the instant appeal:

“1) The order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is erroneous both on facts and in law. 2) The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have considered the grounds of appeal with regard to the amounts added of Rs.1,91,03,816/- and Rs.53,37,800/- and decided the issue on merits. 3) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in merely setting aside the order passed u/ s 154 of the I.T.Act to the file of the Assessing Officer. 4) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have deleted the addition of Rs.1,91,03,816/- made as the same was already admitted by the appellant while filing the return of income. 5) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have deleted the addition on account of commission of Rs.53,37,800/- as the same is not reflected in Form 26AS. 6) Any other ground or grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing”.

3. It transpires during the course of hearing that the CIT(A)’s lower appellate order under challenge has been passed ex-parte.

4. Learned departmental representative invited our attention to the CIT(A)’s order in para 4.1 that the relevant notice of hearing had been duly sent on the registered e-mail ID. We are of the opinion that the assessee cannot be held to be wilfully absent in the lower appellate proceedings only because of a single default at his behest. We therefore restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A) for his afresh adjudication. The assessee or his authorised representative shall appear before the CIT(A) on or before 31-08-2021 with all

:- 3 -: ITA No. 878/Hyd/2019 the relevant detailed evidence to be followed by three effective opportunities of hearing; at his own risk and responsibility.

5.

This appeal of assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.

Order pronounced in the open court on 21st April, 2021

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →