MAHARAJI EDUCATIONAL TRUST,UTTAR PRADESH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 75(3), DELHI, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 217/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 May 2025AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)1 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 that the assessee was not given a proper opportunity on merit and the authorities below had not decided the issues on merit. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the matter was remitted back for denovo assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) which dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. The assessee argued that the Assessing Officer passed an ex-parte order without proper opportunity and an adjournment application was filed via email.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity of being heard by the lower authorities, necessitating a denovo assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 201(1),Section 201(1A)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘A’: NEW DELHI

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gupta, CA
For Respondent: Shri Ramesh Chand, Sr. DR
Hearing: 13.05.2025

(Assessment Year: 2018-19) Maharaji Educational Trust, vs. ITO, Ward 75 (3), H-1, Sector 12, Pratap Vihar, Delhi. Gautam Budh Nagar – 201 009 (UP). (PAN : AAATM5225F) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Suresh Gupta, CA REVENUE BY : Shri Ramesh Chand, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 13.05.2025 Date of Order : 13.05.2025 O R D E R

PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

1.

The assessee has filed appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-24, New Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”, for short] dated 21.11.2024 for the Assessment Year 2018-19.

2.

At the outset, ld. AR for the assessee submitted that Assessing Officer passed the order ex-parte by observing in para 5 of assessment order that neither any reply received nor anybody appeared on 19.08.2019. Further he submitted that verification notice u/s 201(1)/201(1A) was issued on 18.09.2019 to reply by 25.09.2019. Neither any reply was received nor anybody appeared on 25.09.2019. He further submitted that Assessing Officer after issuing various notices observed that neither any reply AO passed the order u/s 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act. He further submitted that the ld. CIT (A) dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution on the ground that no adjournment application was filed on the last date of hearing i.e. 14.11.2024, but the above fact is not correct as the adjournment application was filed through email. Therefore, he prayed that in the interest of justice, assessee may be provided an opportunity of being heard before the Assessing Officer.

3.

On the other hand, ld. DR of the Revenue relied on the orders of the authorities below.

4.

Considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Upon careful consideration, we find that assessee was not given proper opportunity on merit and also authorities below have not decided the issues on merit. We are of the considered view that in the interest of justice, the matter requires denovo assessment. Therefore, we remit back the issues to the file of the Assessing Officer with the directions to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, for which Ld. DR has no objection. Assessee is directed through his counsel to fully cooperate with the AO during the proceedings. We hold and direct accordingly.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 13TH day of May, 2025 after the conclusion of the hearing.

More judgments on Section 201(1)

All 3,835 judgments and leading authorities on Section 201(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →