YOGENDRA SHARMA,NOIDA vs. ACIT CIRCLE-3, NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1059/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 January 2020AY 2009-104 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT held that the CIT(A) erred by deciding the appeals ex-parte and without a reasoned order, violating Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act. The matter was set aside to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were decided ex-parte by the CIT(A) without going into the merits of the additions. The assessee contended that they were not given sufficient opportunity of hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) can decide an appeal ex-parte without providing sufficient opportunity and without passing a reasoned order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)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 BENCH ‘D’, NEW DELHI

Before: MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA & SHRI R.K. PANDA

For Appellant: CA ूयथ क ओर से /
For Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 15.1.2020Pronounced: 27.1.2020

आदेश / ORDER आदेश आदेश आदेश

PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, VP The appeals filed by assessee are against order of CIT(A)-I, Noida, dated 31.08.2018 relating to assessment year 2009-10.

आयकर अपील सं. / 1059 & 1060/Del/2019

2.

In these appeals, the assessee is aggrieved by the order of CIT(A) for deciding the appeals ex-parte qua the assessee and without going into the merits of the addition.

3.

The learned AR for the assessee pointed out that the CIT(A) has passed the ex-parte order without allowing sufficient opportunity of hearing and without going into the merits of the case.

4.

The learned DR for the Revenue on the other hand pointed out that sufficient opportunity has been afforded to the assessee.

5.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. Under the provisions of Section 250(6) of the Income tax Act, 1961 (in short “Act”), it is incumbent upon the CIT(A) to decide the appeals after hearing the parties and state the points for determination, the decision thereon and also the reasons for the decision. While deciding the appeals, CIT(A) has no power to dismiss the appeals for non prosecution by relying on the ratio/s laid down in CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharya & Another 118 ITR 461 (SC) and Late Tukoji Rao Holker vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP). In these facts and circumstances, where the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeals by applying the above said ratios, the order of the learned CIT(A) suffers from infirmity. The CIT(A) while deciding the issue on merits have also to give reasons for coming to the conclusion and in the absence of the same, the order of the CIT(A) again suffers from infirmity. In the present appeals, we find that the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals ex-parte qua the assessee

1.

आयकर अपील सं. / 1059 & 1060/Del/2019 and had failed to decide the appeals by passing reasoned assessment order.

6.

Accordingly, we set aside the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) with direction to the CIT(A) to decide the issue on merits by a reasoned order, after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Further the assessee is also directed to appear before the CIT(A) and participate in the appellate proceedings. The appeals are thus decided on this preliminary issue without going into the merits of the addition.

7.

Hence these appeals are restored back to the file of CIT(A) to decide the issue on merits after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to comply with notices issued by the CIT(A). The preliminary issue raised in these appeals are thus decided in favour of assessee. Since these appeals are being decided on the preliminary issue, we are not addressing the issue raised on merit.

8.

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 27th day of January, 2020.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →