ANIL I KALWANI HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 22/AHD/2019Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 July 2019AY 2015-162 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that the CIT(A) failed to follow the mandatory procedure by not formulating points for determination and recording reasons for the decision, even in the absence of the assessee. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) was not sustainable.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex parte by the CIT(A) for want of prosecution, despite the assessee claiming a lack of reasonable opportunity for hearing. The CIT(A) had scheduled hearings on three occasions, but no one appeared for the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated the appeal by formulating points of determination and recording reasons, even when the assessee failed to appear.

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, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, HON’BLE VICE- & SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, AR
Hearing: 15/07/2019Pronounced: 26/07/2019

आदेश/O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER

1.

Assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against order of the ld.CIT(A)-6, Ahmedabad dated 22.11.2018 passed for the Asstt.Year 2015- 16.

2.

In the first ground of appeal, the assessee has pleaded that its appeal was dismissed by the ld.CIT(A) ex parte without providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

2 3. With the assistance of the ld.representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. It emerges out from the record that the ld.CIT(A) has fixed the hearing of the appeal on three occasions, but no-one appeared on behalf of the assessee, and therefore, she dismissed the appeal of the assessee for want of prosecution. In this connection, it is pertinent to take note of sub-section (6) of section 250 of the Income Tax Act, which reads as under:

6) The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision.

4.

On perusal of section would indicate that the ld.CIT(A) was required to formulate points in dispute, and thereafter record reasons on such points. Even if the assessee did not participate, the ld.CIT(A) ought to have gone through the assessment record and thereafter formed the point in dispute, and should have recorded reasons in support of her conclusions on those points. The ld.CIT(A) failed to adhere the mandatory procedure, hence her order is not sustainable. We allow this appeal of the assessee and set aside the order of the ld.CIT(A). All the issues are remitted back to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Needless to say, during the set aside proceedings, the assessee shall not indulge in dilatory tactics as a strategy to prolong the proceedings and shall cooperate for adjudication of the issue before the ld.CIT(A) in accordance with law.

5.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the Court on 26th July, 2019 at Ahmedabad.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →