BLACKSTONE INFRACON PVT. LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD-5(1), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6005/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 June 2021AY 2014-155 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) should have decided the appeal on merits as per Section 250(6) of the IT Act, not just dismissed it for non-prosecution. Therefore, the case was restored to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee company filed a return declaring a loss. The Assessing Officer made additions, and the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte for want of prosecution, without deciding on merits. The assessee appealed this ex-parte order.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal for want of prosecution without deciding the appeal on merits. The requirement for the CIT(A) to pass a speaking order on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES “SMC-2” : DELHI

Before: SHRI R.K. PANDA

Hearing: 16.06.2021Pronounced: 16.06.2021

ORDER This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the ex-parte Order dated 26.02.2019 of the Ld. CIT(A)-2, New Delhi, relevant to the A.Y. 2014-2015.

2.

Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the ex-parte order of the Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the various additions

1.

2 ITA.No.6005/Del./2019 M/s. Black Stone Infracon Pvt. Ltd., Pachkula. made by the A.O. and determining the total income at Rs.26,97,772/- as against the returned loss of Rs.79,129/-.

3.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite service of notice. Therefore, this appeal is being decided on the basis of material available on record and after hearing the Ld. D.R.

4.

The facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a Company and filed its return of income on 28.09.2015 declaring loss of Rs.(-)79,129/-. The A.O. completed the assessment under section 144 of the I.T. Act on 28.12.2006 determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.26,97,772/-. Since the assessee did not appear before the CIT(A) despite 04 opportunities granted, the Ld. CIT(A) relying on the following decisions dismissed the appeal of assessee for want of prosecution. Judgment of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in 1. the case of Shahbad Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd., 38 taxmann.com 204 (P&H). Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT 2. vs., B.N. Bhattacharya [1977] 118 ITR 461 (SC). Order of ITAT Delhi in the case of Vipul Logistic & 3. Warehousing Pvt. Ltd., vs., ITO in ITA.No.5454/Del./2010 3 ITA.No.6005/Del./2019 M/s. Black Stone Infracon Pvt. Ltd., Pachkula.

5.

Aggrieved with the said order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

6.

I have heard the Ld. D.R. and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that despite opportunities granted by the A.O. as well as the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee did not appear before either of the authorities for which ex-parte orders have been passed by the A.O. as well as the Ld. CIT(A). However, the Ld. CIT(A) in the instant case has not decided the appeal on merits which she was supposed to as per the provisions of Section 250(6) of the I.T. Act, 1961 which reads as under :

“The order of the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals)] or, as the case may be, the Commissioner (Appeals)] disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision.”

6.1. Since in the instant case the Ld. CIT(A) has simply dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution and has not decided the appeal on merits, therefore, considering the 4 ITA.No.6005/Del./2019 M/s. Black Stone Infracon Pvt. Ltd., Pachkula. totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, I deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its claim and decide the issue as per fact and Law and pass a speaking order on merit. The assessee is also hereby directed to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) and substantiate its case without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which, the Ld. CIT(A) is at liberty to pass appropriate orders as per Law. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

7. In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court at the time of hearing itself i.e., on 16.06.2021.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →