SURINDER GARG,PANIPAT vs. ITO WARD - 1, PANIPAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6085/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 April 2025AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON'BLE (Vice President)3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) did not discuss the issues on merits or jurisdiction and dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution, which is not permissible. The Tribunal remitted the issues back to the CIT(A) to pass a speaking order after providing an adequate opportunity.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed by the NFAC for the assessment year 2012-13. The assessee's AR contended that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard, violating natural justice.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without providing the assessee with adequate opportunity of being heard and without discussing the merits of the case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’’ : NEW DELHI

For Appellant: Shri J.B. Sharma, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 15.04.2025Pronounced: 15.04.2025

Asstt. Year : 2012-13 SURINDER GARG, VS. ITO, WARD-1, PANIPAT C/O J.B. SHARMA, ADV. 72, BMK MARKET, NR HOTEL HIVE, GT ROAD, PANIPAT HARYANA (PAN: AGBPG4166C) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri J.B. Sharma, Adv. Respondent by : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 15.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement 15.04.2025 ORDER This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order dated 30.7.2024 passed by the NFAC, Delhi for the assessment year 2012-13.

2.

At the outset, Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in passing the order exparte without providing the reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee in clear violation of principle of natural justice. He further submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has not given adequate findings on the issue of jurisdiction as well as on merits of the case.

3.

I have heard the rival contentions and perused the records. Upon careful consideration, I find that Ld. CIT(A) has not discussed the issues on merits as well on jurisdiction issue, rather he dismissed the appeal on account of non-prosecution, which is not permissible. Hence, in the interest of justice, I remit back the issues in dispute to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with the directions to pass a reasonable and speaking order on the jurisdictional ground as well as on merits of the case, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, for which ld. DR has no objection. Assessee is also directed to fully cooperate with the Ld. CIT(A) during the proceedings.

4.

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes Order pronounced in the Open Court on 15.04.2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →