SHAM SUNDER GUPTA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-7(1), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 498/DEL/2020Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 September 2022AY 2011-122 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) was not empowered to dismiss the appeal in limine without deciding the grounds on merit. The assessee was not provided with a due opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed in limine without a proper opportunity of being heard. The CIT(A) relied on previous judgments without deciding the grounds on merit. The Revenue conceded that the appeal was dismissed ex parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal in limine without deciding the grounds on merit and without providing a due opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH : SMC : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI C.M. GARG

For Respondent: Shri Mithalesh Kr. Pandey, Sr. DR
Hearing: 14.09.2022Pronounced: 14.09.2022

BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sham Sunder Gupta, Vs. ACIT, H-108, 2nd Floor, Circle-7(1), Connaught Place, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN: AISPG6871B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Mithalesh Kr. Pandey, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 14.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 14.09.2022 ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 29.11.2019 of the CIT(A)-3, New Delhi, relating to Assessment Year 2011-12.

2.

At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment application has been filed. However, we find this matter could be disposed of even in the absence of the assessee. Therefore, we proceed to adjudicate this appeal after hearing the ld. Sr. DR.

3.

On careful perusal of the order of the ld.CIT(A), I find the ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order in limine applying the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. BN Bhattacharya (1997) 118 ITR 461 (SC) and the decision of the ITAT Delhi in the case CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd., reported in 38 ITD 320 (Delhi). We also find that the impugned order has been passed by the ld.CIT(A) ex parte qua the assesseer without giving any final opportunity to the assessee and without deciding the grounds taken by the assessee on merit.

4.

The ld. Sr. DR, in all fairness, admitted that the ld.CIT(A) has adjudicated the appeal of the assessee in limine and, therefore, the Department has no serious objection if the matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, after allowing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

5.

On careful consideration of the submissions of the ld. Sr. DR and on perusal of the order of the ld.CIT(A), I am of the considered opinion that the assessee has not been provided due opportunity of being heard before the ld.CIT(A) and the ld.CIT(A) has also not decided the grounds of appeal on merits and, instead, dismissed the appeal in limine which the ld. CIT(A) is not empowered to do. Since the ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal ex parte without deciding the grounds taken by the assessee in Form No.35 on merits and dismissed the appeal in limine, the order of the CIT(A) is set aside and the appeal

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →