Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘FIRDAY’, NEW DELHI
Before: MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA & DR. B.R.R. KUMAR
अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant by : Sh. Paras Dawar, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से / Respondent by : Sh. Rajat Kumar Kured, Addl.CIT. सुनवाई की तारीख / घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 31.01.2020 Date of Pronouncement: 31.01.2020 आदेश / ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, VP The present appeal and the stay application filed by assessee are against order of CIT(A)-3, New Delhi dated 26/11/2019, relating to assessment year 2016-17 against order passed under section 143(3) of the Act.
The appeal and the stay application relating to the assessee were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience.
3. In this appeal, the assessee is aggrieved by the order of CIT(A) for deciding the appeal ex-parte qua the assessee and without going into the merits of the addition.
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.
The learned DR for the Revenue on the other hand pointed out that sufficient opportunity has been afforded to the assessee.
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record.
Under the provisions of Section 250(6) of the Income tax Act, 1961 (in 2 SA No.81/Del/2020 short “Act”), it is incumbent upon the CIT(A) to decide the appeal after hearing the parties and state the points for determination, the decision thereon and also the reasons for the decision. While deciding the appeal, CIT(A) has no power to dismiss the appeal 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 appeal 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 appeal, we find that the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal ex-parte qua the assessee and had failed to decide the appeal by passing reasoned appellate order.
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 appeal is thus decided on this preliminary issue without going into the merits of the addition.
Hence this appeal is 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 this appeal is thus 3 SA No.81/Del/2020 decided in favour of assessee. Since the appeal is being decided on the preliminary issue, we are not addressing the issue raised on merit.
Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Consequent to the decision of the appeal as in the case of the assessee, the stay application is dismissed.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and stay application of the assessee is dismissed.