INDUS AIRWAYS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-12(1), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1754/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 March 2025AY 2010-11Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, SHRI VIMAL KUMAR (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed for statistical purposes

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's contention and, in the interest of justice, remitted both appeals back to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration. The CIT(A) is directed to decide the issues afresh after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who is also directed to cooperate.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against the NFAC orders for assessment years 2010-11 and 2012-13, which were dismissed by the CIT(A) due to the assessee's failure to file proper details before both the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A). The assessee's counsel pleaded for an opportunity to present the case by remitting the matters back to the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the appeals, dismissed by the CIT(A) for non-furnishing of details, should be remitted back to the CIT(A) to provide the assessee with an opportunity to present its case afresh.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “C”, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, & SHRI VIMAL KUMAR

For Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT(DR) &, Shri Om Prakash, Sr. D.R
Hearing: 24.03.2025Pronounced: 24.03.2025

ORDER

PER SHAMIM YAHYA, AM :

1.

The Asessee has filed these Appeals against the separate Orders of the Ld. NFAC, New Delhi both dated 15.02.2024, relating to assessment years 2010-11 & 2012-13.

2.

In both these cases, Ld. CIT(A) has noted that assesse has not filed proper details before the AO and he also noted that proper documents were not filed before the Ld. CIT(A), hence, he dismissed the appeals of the assessee. In this regard, Assessee has taken the ground nos. 4 & 6 in assessment year 2011-12 and ground no. 5 in assessment year 2011-12 respectively. Hence, Ld. AR pleaded that an opportunity may be given to the assessee to canvass the cases before the Ld. CIT(A) by remitting back the issues to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration. Ld. DR did not have any objection to this proposition.

3.

We have heard both the parties and perused the records. We find considerable cogency in the aforesaid contention of the Ld. AR. After considering the aforesaid factual matrix, we are of the considered view, that interest of justice will be served, if the issues in dispute in both the appeals are remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We hold and direct accordingly. The assessee through his Ld. AR is also directed to cooperate with the Ld. CIT(A) in the proceedings in the captioned appeals.

4.

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 24.03.2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →