NORD DRIVESYSTEMS PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, TDS (CPC), GHAZIABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals. It held that the ex-parte orders of the CIT(Appeals) were in contravention of Section 250(6) of the Act, which mandates reasoned orders.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeals were filed with a delay of 2 days. The CIT(Appeals) had passed ex-parte orders dismissing the appeals for want of prosecution.
What were the issues?
Whether the ex-parte orders passed by the CIT(Appeals) for want of prosecution were valid and whether the assessee should be granted a fresh opportunity to present their case on merits.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, PUNE
Before: SHRI R.S.SYAL, VP & SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM
PER BENCH : These bunch of appeals preferred by the assessee emanates from the respective orders of the Ld. CIT(Appeals), Pune-10 dated 28.06.2018 for the assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15 respectively as per the grounds of appeal on record. A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15
At the outset, we notice that the present appeal is time barred by 2 days. The assessee has filed an affidavit along with condonation of delay petition. We have gone through the condonation petition as well as the affidavit and have found that reasons specified therein are justified and that the delay cannot be attributed to the deliberate conduct of the assessee neither through intention nor through action. The reasons for delay in filing the appeal late were beyond the control of the assessee and even the Ld. DR stated that he has no objection, if the delay is condoned. In view of the matter, we condone the delay and proceed to hear the appeal on merits.
At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that in all these appeals, the order passed by the Ld. CIT(Appeals) is an ex-parte order and in contravention to Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟). The Ld. AR prayed for a final opportunity to present their case on merits before the Ld. CIT(Appeals).
Per contra, the Ld. DR opposed the prayer of the Ld. AR stating that several opportunities had been given to the assessee and providing any further opportunity would ultimately result in prolonging the legal proceedings.
We have perused the case records and heard the rival contentions. We find that the orders passed by the Ld.CIT(Appeals) for each of the above captioned matter is an ex-parte order wherein the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has dismissed the appeals of the assessee for want of prosecution. The rights and liabilities of the parties herein are yet to be determined at the First Appellate stage. We find Section 250(6) of the Act states “the order of the Ld. CIT(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.”. The provision clearly states that the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has to be a reasoned order dealing with merits of the case and coming to a A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15
decision supported by proper determination of each points raised in appeal before the First Appellate Authority. The orders for all the above captioned matters passed by the Ld. CIT(Appeals) is in contravention to the aforesaid provision.
In view of the matter, we set aside the orders of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) in all of the aforementioned matter and restore them to his file for fresh adjudication in accordance with the provisions of section 250(6) of the Act. At the same time, we direct the assessee to be present for hearing before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) with all relevant documentary evidences and present their case on merits and the Ld. CIT(Appeals) shall adjudicate this matter after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
In the result, all the appeals of the assessee as hereinabove mentioned are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 12th day of July, 2019. R.S.SYAL PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER ऩुणे / Pune; ददनाांक / Dated : 12th July, 2019. SB आदेश की प्रतिलऱपप अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अऩीऱाथी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent.
The CIT(Appeals), Pune-10. 4. The CIT(TDS), Pune. , आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, “सी” बेंच, 5. ववभागीय प्रतततनधध ऩुणे / DR, ITAT, “C” Bench, Pune. गार्ड फ़ाइऱ / Guard File. 6. //// आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,
तनजी सधचव / Private Secretary आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, ऩुणे / ITAT, Pune. A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15
Date 1 Draft dictated on 12.07.2019 Sr.PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 12.07.2019 Sr.PS/PS 3 Draft proposed and placed JM/AM before the second Member 4 Draft discussed/approved by AM/JM second Member 5 Approved draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of order Sr.PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr.PS/PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R 11 Date of dispatch of order
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bangi Mines And Minerals vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Arka Business Solutions vs. Principal Commissioner Of CustomsTelangana · 30 Oct 2026