M/S. UNIQUE PRINTERS,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(3), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2929/AHD/2017Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 October 2019AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remanded the matter back for a fresh decision. The assessee was directed to deposit Rs. 5,000/- as cost to the revenue.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was disposed of ex parte without sufficient opportunity of hearing, as notices were returned unserved. The CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance of Rs. 7,78,601/- and depreciation on a motor car.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in disposing of the appeal ex parte without providing a sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD & SHRI WASEEM AHMED

For Appellant: Smt. Artiben N. Shah, AR

PER MAHAVIR PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER

1.

This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-5, Ahmedabad dated 06.11.2017 pertaining to A.Y. 2014-15 and following grounds have been taken:

2 . A.Y. 2014-15 1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts of the case by disposing the appeal filed by the Appellant without giving sufficient opportunity of hearing.

2. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts of the case by confirming disallowance of Rs.7,78,601/- made u/s.l4Ar.w.r. 8D of the I.T. Act, 1961.

3.

The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming the finding of the Assessing Officer that the Appellant is not entitled to depreciation on motor car @ 50% as claimed by the Appellant, and accordingly, has confirmed that the Assessing Officer has rightly allowed depreciation @ 15%.

4. Your Appellant prays to reserve the right to add, alter, amend and/or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal.

2.

Facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of manufacturing and printing.

3. At the outset, ld. A.R. vehemently argued that ld. CIT(A) has passed an ex parte order without affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and same is amount to miscarriage of justice. And ld. CIT(A) sent two notices to the assessee but same were returned unserved. And ld. CIT(A) has not passed any detailed and reasoned order rather he just confirmed the order of the ld. Assessing Officer.

4.

We have heard both the parties and gone through the relevant record and impugned order. We are of the opinion that reasonable and fair opportunity should be given to the parties in order to pass detailed, reasonable and speaking order. We do understand that after filing the appeal with the ld. CIT(A), it was duty of the assessee to follow up his appeal for which he failed to do so. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we set aside this matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide matter afresh after giving an opportunity of being 3 . A.Y. 2014-15 heard to the assessee with the condition that assessee shall deposit Rs. 5000/- as a cost to the revenue within one month after receiving this order and ld. CIT(A) will proceed with the appeal only after production of receipt of Rs. 5,000/- by the assessee.

5.

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in Open Court on 18- 10- 2019

More judgments on Section 14A

All 15,875 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →