KISHORE KUMAR SINGH,AURANGABAD vs. ACIT CIRCLE-3, GAYA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 334/PAT/2023Status: DisposedITAT Patna25 September 2024AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(Appeals) failed to follow the procedure under Section 250(6) by not adjudicating the appeal on merit. The impugned order was set aside, and the case was restored to the CIT(Appeals) for a decision on merit after granting an opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed to the CIT(Appeals) against the Assessing Officer's estimation of income at 10% of gross receipts. The CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution without adjudicating on the merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in dismissing the appeal for want of prosecution instead of deciding it on merit. Whether the CIT(Appeals) followed the prescribed procedure for disposing of an appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA-PATNA ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(KZ) & Dr. Manish Borad

Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 31st October, 2023 passed for assessment year 2017-18.

1.

Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Kishore Kumar Singh 2. The only grievance of the assessee is that ld. Assessing Officer has erred in estimating the income at 10% of the gross receipts and such estimation has been upheld by the ld. CIT(Appeals) by dismissing the appeal of the assessee for want of prosecution.

3.

With the assistance of ld. Representative, we have gone through the record carefully. Sub-Section (6) of section 250 contemplates that ld. CIT(Appeals) would state the points in dispute and thereafter record reasons on those points in support of her conclusion. In the impugned order, ld. CIT(Appeals) has not adjudicated on the issue on merit, rather dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. Therefore, we set aside the impugned order of ld. CIT(Appeals) and restore this issue to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) for deciding it on merit. It is needless to say that ld. CIT(Appeals) would grant opportunity of hearing to the assessee and thereafter decide the appeal on merit.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 25.09.2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →