MICRO LAND DEVELPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,HARYANA vs. ITO, WARD-16(4), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 9510/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 April 2025AY 2011-12Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had proceeded ex parte without giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh determination on merits and law, after providing the assessee with a proper opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against a CIT(A) order that arose from an assessment under Section 147 read with Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary contention was that the CIT(A) order was passed ex parte without affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee, despite the assessee seeking adjournments and the final notice remaining unserved.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex parte order against the assessee without providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing, necessitating a remand for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3)

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, DELHI BENCHES: E : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

For Appellant: Shri Amol Sinha, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav, CIT-DR
Hearing: 21.04.2025Pronounced: 21.04.2025

Assessment Year: 2011-12 Micro Land Developers Pvt Ltd., Vs ITO, Office No.322, 3rd Floor, Ward-16(4), SS Plaza, Commercial Complex, New Delhi. Mayfield Garden, Sector-47, Gurgaon, Haryana – 122 001. PAN: AAFCM0432L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Amol Sinha, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 21.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 21.04.2025 ORDER

PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

1.

This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 04.11.2019 of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Delhi-6 (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. First Appellate Authority or ‘the Ld. FAA’, for short) in Appeal No.CIT(A), Delhi-6/10443/2018-19 arising out of the appeal before it against the order dated 30.12.2018 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’) by the ITO, Ward-16(4), New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO).

2.

On hearing both the sides, we find that amongst other grounds on merits, the assessee has raised a ground that the impugned order of the CIT(A) was passed without giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing. In this context, as we go through the impugned order, we find that judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in B.N. Bhattacharjee & Anr., 118 ITR 461, was relied and the assessee was proceeded ex parte.

3.

Ld. CIT(A) mentions of certain notices being served but, the same indicate that the assessee was seeking adjournment through the AR and when the last notice was issued by speed post same was not returned served or unserved.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →