NARENDRA KUMAR SAINI,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 62(5), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1436/DEL/2020Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 July 2022AY 2016-173 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's submissions and, with the concession of the Revenue, decided to restore the matter to the AO. The AO is to adjudicate the case afresh after providing the assessee with a due opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee contended that they were not granted a proper opportunity of hearing by the Assessing Officer (AO) and the CIT(A), leading to the non-submission of crucial documents. The assessee requested the appeal be restored to the AO for a fresh hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity of hearing by the lower authorities, and if so, whether the case should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI C.M. GARG & SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA

For Appellant: Shri Akshay Bhatia, Advocate
For Respondent: Ms Ritu Singh Sharma, Sr. DR
Hearing: 21.07.2022Pronounced: 22.07.2022

BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 Narendra Kumar Saini, Vs. ITO, 2563-64, Gali No.10, Ward-62(5), Bhagat Singh Gali, New Delhi. Chuna Mandi, Paharganj, New Delhi – 110 055. PAN : ARVPS0288E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Akshay Bhatia, Advocate Revenue by : Ms Ritu Singh Sharma, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 21.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 22.07.2022 ORDER

PER C.M. GARG, JM:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld.CIT(A)-20, New Delhi, dated 21.02.2020, relating to Assessment Year 2016- 17.

2.

When the appeal was taken up for hearing, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that that the assessee was not allowed due opportunity of hearing before the AO which resulted in non-filing of some relevant documents during

the assessment proceedings. It was also submitted that the ld.CIT(A) also has passed the impugned order in haste without allowing due opportunity of hearing to the assessee to enable him to explain the stand of the assessee on the grounds raised by the assessee in Form No.35. It was, therefore, submitted that the appeal may be restored to the file of the AO for a fresh hearing, after allowing due opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

3.

The ld Sr. DR fairly conceded that the assessee was not given due opportunity of hearing before the lower authorities and had no objection in restoring the appeal to the file of the AO.

4.

We have heard the rival arguments and perused the relevant material available on record. Keeping in view the submissions of both the sides and on perusal of the orders of the authorities below, we find it just and proper restoring the matter to the file of the AO for denovo adjudication after allowing due opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →