Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2013-14. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal on grounds of non-prosecution without deciding the matter on merits.
Held
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) erred by dismissing the appeal without a hearing on merits. The case was remitted back to the CIT(A) to decide the issues after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal on non-prosecution without deciding the case on merits, and whether the assessee was denied a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C’’ : NEW DELHI
Asstt. Year : 2013-14 JALANDHAR AMRITSAR TOLLWAYS LTD. VS. DY CIT, CIRCLE 13(1), 92, 1ST FLOOR, GREEN PARK EXTENSION, ROOM NO. 316A, NEW DELHI – 16 C.R. BUILDING, (PAN: AABCJ6270F) I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI-2 / (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Kalyana Sundar, CA Respondent by : Sh. Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 14.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement 14.05.2025 ORDER
PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT :
This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order dated 04.10.2019 passed by the CIT (A), New Delhi for the assessment year 2013-14.
Heard both the parties and perused the records.
At the outset, Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in passing the order without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. He further submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of non-prosecution and even not decided the matter on merits of the case. Hence, it was prayed that the matter may be remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with the directions to decide the issues in dispute afresh, on the merits of the case and also provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Ld. DR did not controvert the aforesaid proposition.
Upon careful consideration, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has not discussed the issues on merits, rather he dismissed the appeal on account of non-prosecution, which is not permissible. Hence, in the interest of justice, we remit back the issues in dispute to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with the directions to pass a reasonable and speaking order on the issues in dispute, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, for which ld. DR has no objection. Assessee is also directed to fully cooperate with the Ld. CIT(A) during the proceedings.