SUNIL DHUPAR,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-3(4), NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1564/DEL/2023Status: HeardITAT Delhi21 March 2025AY 2009-10Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD (Judicial Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that the CIT(Appeals) passed cryptic orders without addressing the merits of the additions and penalty. The Tribunal restored the appeals to the CIT(Appeals) for a fresh decision after providing an adequate opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against the orders of the CIT(Appeals) for AY 2009-10, which sustained additions and penalty. The assessee contended that the CIT(Appeals) disposed of the appeals ex parte despite an adjournment request.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in disposing of the appeals ex parte without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee and without deciding on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 148,Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA & SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh Gupta, CA
For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Mahajan, Sr. DR
Hearing: 21.03.2025

सुनवाईक�तारीख/ Date of hearing: 21.03.2025 21.03.2025 उ�ोषणाक�तारीख/Pronouncement on आदेश /O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD, J.M.

These two appeals are filed by the Assessee against different orders of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi dated 22/03/2023 for the AY 2009-10 in sustaining the addition made by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 148 as well as penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act.

2.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, referring to ground no. 3.1 of grounds of appeal in both these appeals, submitted that the Ld. CIT(Appeals) disposed of the appeal ex parte on 22/03/2023 even though the assessee had filed an application for adjournment on 21/03/2023 seeking time till 04/04/2023.

Therefore, the Ld. Counsel submits that these appeals may be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) for deciding afresh after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

3.

The Ld. DR has no serious objection in this regard.

4.

Heard rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below. On going through the orders of the Ld. CIT(Appeals), we observe that the Ld. CIT(A) disposed of the appeals without giving any findings on merits of the addition made in the assessment and also on the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. The orders passed by the Ld. CIT(A) were very-very cryptic and running into few lines. It is also the submission of the Ld. Counsel that in spite of seeking adjournment the Ld. CIT(Appeals) disposed off the appeals ex parte without providing adequate opportunity.

Therefore, taking the totality of facts and circumstances into consideration these appeals are restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(Appeals) who shall decide afresh after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

5.

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 21.03.2025

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →