CHUN MUN STORES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 6(1), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2586/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 July 2021AY 2012-134 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee deserves a final chance to explain its case, as the proceedings before the lower authorities were not properly attended. The matter was set aside to the AO for a fresh decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed its return of income, which was selected for scrutiny. The Assessing Officer (AO) later issued notices for rectification under Section 154, but the assessee did not appear or reply. The AO proceeded to increase the assessed income based on the rectification.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a sufficient opportunity to present its case before the AO and CIT(A) during rectification proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SH. N. K. BILLAIYA & SH. AMIT SHUKLA

Hearing: 06/07/2021Pronounced: 06/07/2021

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the CIT(A)-2, New Delhi dated 15.02.2018 pertaining to A.Y. 2012-13. 2. The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee is that neither the AO nor the CIT(A) have given sufficient opportunity to the assessee to explain its case and the CIT(A) erred in confirming the order framed u/s.154 of the Act.

3.

Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income on 29.09.2012 declaring income of Rs. 3.03 crores. The return was selected for scrutiny assessment and assessment order dated 18.03.2015 was framed u/s. 143 (3) of the Act.

4.

Vide notice dated 13.07.2015 the AO chose to rectify the mistake apparent from record in the assessment order dated 18.03.2015. None attended on behalf of the assessee.

5.

A second notice was issued on 23.09.2015 which was received by the authorized representative of the assessee company but again no reply was furnished. The AO rectified the assessment order by increasing the assessed income by Rs.7092420/-.

6.

Assessee carried the matter before the CIT(A) but without any success.

7.

From the body of the order of the first appellate authority we find that the proceeding before him were never attended by the assessee and he was forced to pass the appellate order.

8.

Considering the facts in totality, we are of the considered view that for whatever reason the proceedings before the authorities below were not properly attended, the assessee deserves a final chance to explain its case.

9.

We, therefore, set aside the entire issue to the files of the AO. The AO is directed to decide the issue fresh after giving a reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee and the assessee is directed to avail this final opportunity and present its case.

10.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. 11. Decision announced in the open court in the presence of both the representatives on 06.07.2021.

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →