What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT found that the CIT(A) had not decided the appeal on merits. Therefore, the Tribunal remanded the case back to the CIT(A) to decide the appeal on merits after giving the assessee a proper opportunity of hearing.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed in limine due to non-appearance. The assessee then filed an appeal before the ITAT against this dismissal.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal for non-appearance without deciding on merits. The primary issue was the procedural dismissal of the appeal.

Rvr Infrastructure Limited vs ITO | ITAT Hyderabad 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCH ‘A, HYDERABAD

Before: SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI & SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY

For Appellant: Shri Mohd. Afzal

For Respondent: Shri Sunku Srinivas

Hearing: 30/10/2019Pronounced: 15/11/2019

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH ‘A', HYDERABAD BEFORE SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1243/Hyd/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s RVR Infrastructures vs. Income-tax Officer, Ltd., Hyderabad. Ward – 3(2), Hyderabad. PAN – AADCR 8231 L

Appellant Respondent Assessee by: Shri Mohd. Afzal Revenue by: Shri Sunku Srinivas Date of hearing: 30/10/2019 Date of pronouncement: 15/11/2019 O R D E R PER P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M.:

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A) – 3, Hyderabad, dated 14/03/2018, dismissing the assessee’s appeal in limine for non-appearance of the assessee.

After hearing both the parties, we are of the view that since the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal for non-appearance by the assessee and has not disposed of the appeal on merits, we deem it fit and proper to remand the file back to the file of CIT(A) with a direction to dispose of the appeal on merits and in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee in the matter. We order accordingly.

2 I.T.A. No. 1243/H/18 RVR Infrastructures Ltd., Hyd. 3. In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open court on 15th November, 2019.

Sd/- Sd/- (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (P. MADHAVI DEVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, dated 15th November, 2019. kv Copy forwarded to: 1. M/s RVR Infrastructures ltd., C/o Mohd. Afzal, Advocate, 11- 5-465, Sherson’s Residency, Flat No. 402, Criminal Court Road, Red Hills, Hyderabad – 500 004. 2. ITO, Ward – 3(2), Signature Towers, Kondapur, Hyderabad 3. CIT(A) – 3, Hyderabad 4. Pr. CIT – 3, Hyderabad. 5. The DR, ITAT, Hyderabad 6. Guard File

RVR INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2), HYDERABAD

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments