M/S. MOTI LAL DULICHAND (P) LTD.,KANPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, KANPUR

ITA 540/LKW/2018Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow25 October 2019AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without providing a proper opportunity to the assessee and without deciding the appeal on merit. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) for non-appearance and non-filing of submissions. The assessee contended that proper opportunity was not provided and that the CIT(A) failed to consider relevant documents and statements.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without providing adequate opportunity and considering the merits of the case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ia),Section 35(1)(ii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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, LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI A.D JAIN & SHRI T.S. KAPOOR

For Appellant: Shri J.J. Mehrotra, CA
For Respondent: Shri Jai Nath Verma, DR
Hearing: 23/10/2019Pronounced: 25/10/2019

PER: A.D. JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT:

This is assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2013-14 against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-II, Kanpur dated 08.06.2018, taking the following grounds:

“1. That the Ld. C.I.T.(A)-II. Kanpur, has erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal ex-parte on the basis of alleged non appearance or non filing of written submissions in compliance to his very first e-notice for hearing fixed on 3rd January, 2018 after lapse of approximately 5 months vide order Dated 06.06.2018, and mentioning wrong facts in respect of earlier 2 notices.

2.

That the Ld. C.I.T.(A)-II, Kanpur has also erred in law and on facts in not considering and appreciating the details, findings and chronology of events mentioned on the order sheets entries, particu

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)

All 7,300 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(ia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →