FOURRTS (INDIA LABS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT (OSD) CORPORATE CIRCLE 2, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1941/CHNY/2019Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 June 2022AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal on merits after refusing to condone the delay, and that too without affording the assessee an opportunity of being heard. The order of the CIT(A) was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a delay of 188 days, and the CIT(A) also adjudicated the issues on merits without providing an opportunity to be heard. The CIT(A) did not properly consider the reasons for the delay provided by the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) can adjudicate an appeal on merits after refusing to condone the delay without providing an opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGHAND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA

Hearing: 21.06.2022Pronounced: 21.06.2022

O R D E R PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP: This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Chennai in dated 03.04.2019. The assessment was framed by the ACIT (OSD), Corporate Range-2, Chennai u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’) for the assessment year 2013-14 vide order dated 25.03.2016.

1.

2 2. At the time of hearing, it is noticed that on last many occasions none is present from assessee’s side and on going through the grounds raised by assessee, we noted that the CIT(A) has refused to condone the delay of 188 days and also deliberated the issue on merits without confronting to the assessee. For this, assessee has raised 11 grounds contending various facets of arguments.

3.

The ld. senior DR was specifically asked as to why once CIT(A) has not condoned the delay and not admitted the appeal, he has adjudicated the issues on merits also and dismissed the appeal of assessee. The CIT(A) in para 4 in the result has mentioned as under: “4. In the result, the appeal is dismissed on the ground of delay as well as merits” When the above facts were confronted to ld. senior DR, he could not controvert the above facts that the appeal is dismissed in limine by not condoning the delay and also dismissed on merits.

4.

We noted that the assessee has filed affidavit stating the reasons along with application for condonation of delay and delay is for 188 days. We noted that the CIT(A) has not all discussed the facts regarding delay mentioned in the affidavit. We are of the view

3 that once the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as un-admitted on account of barred by limitation, the CIT(A) cannot decide the issues on merits and that also without providing opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Accordingly, we set aside the order of CIT(A) and remand the matter back to his file for fresh adjudication, first on the issue of condonation by passing a speaking order. In case, he condones the delay and admit the appeal, he will adjudicate the issue on merits. Therefore, the order of CIT(A) is set aside and appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 21st June, 2022 at Chennai.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →