SANJAY SAWHNEY,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 34(3), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4052/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 October 2021AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without granting the assessee an opportunity of hearing. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for proper adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a proprietor of a hospitality business, filed an income tax return. The Assessing Officer disallowed Rs. 14,46,945 claimed as interest expenses. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without providing an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Whether the disallowance of interest expenses under Section 57(iii) was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 57(iii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE & DR. B. R. R. KUMAR

Hearing: 11.10.2021Pronounced: 14.10.2021

ORDER

PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM

1.

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 18/01/2018 passed by CIT(A)-12, New Delhi for Assessment Year 2014-15.

2.

The grounds of appeal

are as under:- “1. That both the lower authorities grossly erred in law in making and sustaining the assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act. The assessment order passed and sustained by both the authorities deserves to be quashed since the same is not in accordance with Law.

2. That under the facts and circumstances of the case, both the lower authorities grossly erred in making and sustaining the addition of Rs. 14,46,945/- u/s 57(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.”

3. The assessee is a proprietor of M/s Blessing Hospitality which is engaged in the business of hospitality services. Income Tax Return declaring net taxable income at Rs. 3,50,400/- was filed on 29/11/2014 for Assessment Year 2014-15. The Assessing Officer disallowed Rs. 14,46,945/- which were claimed as interest against the interest on income u/s 57(iii) of the Act.

4.

Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

5.

The Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order and matter may be remanded back to the file of the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) after giving proper opportunity of hearing to assessee, pass the appropriate order on merit.

6.

The Ld. DR relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A).

7.

We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is pertinent to note that the CIT(A) has passed the order without taking cognizance of the assessee’s submissions and not granting any opportunity of hearing to the assessee or his counsel. It is an ex-parte order. Therefore, we are remanding back the issues contested herein to the file of the CIT(A) for proper adjudication on merits as per law. Needless to say, the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following principles of natural justice. The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.

More judgments on Section 57(iii)

All 716 judgments and leading authorities on Section 57(iii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →