MALIK ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-16(2), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5495/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 July 2022AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT held that the CIT(A) should have decided the appeal on merits after serving proper notice and providing a sufficient opportunity to be heard. The appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex parte. The assessee did not appear for the hearing before the ITAT, and the CIT(A)'s order was confirmed without proper notice to the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex parte without proper notice and opportunity to be heard to the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI

Before: SH. N. K. BILLAIYA & SH. YOGESH KUMAR US

Hearing: 26/07/2022Pronounced: 26/07/2022

Appellant None Respondent Ms. Rinku Singh, CIT DR Date of hearing: 26/07/2022 Date of Pronouncement: 26/07/2022 ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM:

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the CIT(A)-38, New Delhi dated 09.06.2017 pertaining to A.Y.2011-12.

2.

The grievance of the assessee read as under :-

3.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee inspite of notice. We decided to proceed exparte. Having heard the Ld. DR we have carefully perused the orders of the authorities below.

4.

We find that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by an exparte order. We find that the appeal before the CIT(A) was transferred vide order of PCCIT, New Delhi dated 24.11.2016. Though there is mention of notice issued by the CIT(A) but there is no reference to show that the notice was actually served upon the assessee. We find that the CIT(A) has extracted the assessment order and has confirmed the addition.

5.

We are of the considered view that the CIT(A) ought to have decided the appeal on merits after serving a proper notice and after affording a reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

6.

Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play we restore this appeal to the files of the CIT(A). The CIT(A) is directed to serve a proper notice and afford a reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decide the appeal on merits of the case. The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose.

7.

Decision announced in the open court on 26.07.2022.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →