JIYA ECO-PRODUSTS LIMITED,BHAVANGAR vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAVANAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1109/AHD/2018Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 July 2019AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) had a duty to decide the appeal on merits, even in the absence of the assessee, and that the ex parte order was passed without proper procedure. Therefore, the case was set aside for a fresh decision on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was disposed of ex parte by the CIT(A) without considering the merits of the case or providing a proper opportunity to be heard. The assessee claimed that no notice was served, leading to the ex parte order.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex parte order without affording a proper opportunity of hearing and without deciding the appeal on merits.

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, AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH

Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Shah, AR

PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER

1.

This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-6, Ahmedabad dated 09.02.2018 pertaining to A.Y. 2015-16 and following grounds have been taken:

2 . A.Y. 2015-16 1. Disposing off the appeal ex parte - without going into the facts of the case; the applicable provisions of law, as interpreted by various Courts and Tribunal Benches; without giving proper opportunity of being heard; and without appreciating that the non-attendance of the Appellant was clearly attributable to the reasons much beyond its control;

2. In not reversing the action of the AO in disallowing the legitimate claim of deduction of Rs.2,07,86,523/- under section 80JJA of the Act, although all the terms and conditions in this regard were fully satisfied;

3.

In not reversing the action of the AO in disallowing the interest expenditure of Rs.20,250/- by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act (inadvertently mentioned as section 40(a)(i) in the assessment order);

4.

In not reversing the action of the AO in disallowing an aggregate sum of Rs.9,03,272/- under section 40A(3) of the Act.

2.

At the outset, ld. A.R. argued that no notice was served to the assessee and ld. CIT(A) has passed ex parte order on technical ground without discussing merit of the case.

3. Since neither notice was received by the appellant nor appeal was decided by the ld. CIT(A) on merit. It was the bounden duty of A.O. to dispose of the grounds on merits in terms of Section 250(6) of the Act notwithstanding non- appearance of the assessee. Therefore in the interest of justice, we are of the considered view, this is a fit case for setting aside back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) who will decide the appeal on merit as per provision of law after being given an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

3 . A.Y. 2015-16 4. In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in Open Court on 29- 07- 2019

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →