M/S VRL RETAILER BUSINESS SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,FARIDABAD vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2554/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 September 2019AY 2010-113 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(A) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to present its case. The assessee is directed to appear without adjournment and substantiate its claims.

What were the facts?

The assessee, engaged in advisory and consultancy services, filed a return declaring a loss. The Assessing Officer made additions, determining a total income of Rs. 48,58,091/-. The CIT(A) confirmed these additions in an ex parte order due to the assessee's non-appearance.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in passing an ex parte order without granting sufficient opportunity to the assessee, and if the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH : D : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R.K. PANDA & SHRI KULDIP SINGH

For Respondent: Smt. Naina Soin Kapil, Sr. DR
Hearing: 04.09.2019Pronounced: 04.09.2019

ORDER

PER R.K. PANDA, AM:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 24th October, 2014 of the CIT(A)-19, New Delhi, relating to assessment year 2010-11.

2.

The assessee in its various grounds of appeal has challenged the ex parte order of the CIT(A) confirming the order of the Assessing Officer determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.48,58,091/- as against the returned loss of Rs.2,56,61,303/-

3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite service of notice. Since there was also non-appearance before the CIT(A), therefore, this appeal was taken up for hearing on the basis of the material available on record and after hearing the ld. DR.

4.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is engaged in providing advisory and consultancy services to financial intermediaries, brokers and insurers, fund managers, risk managers in the areas including without limitation customer relationship management, international and domestic markets, record maintenance, product selection and design, marketing and promotions, customer promotional schemes and channel management. It filed its return of income on 13th October, 2010 declaring a loss of Rs.2,56,61,303/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment at a total income of Rs.48,58,091/- making various additions. Since none appeared before the CIT(A), the CIT(A), in the ex parte order passed by him, sustained the various additions made by the Assessing Officer.

5.

Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. It is pertinent to mention here that the ld.CIT(A) has decided the issue on merit.

6.

We have considered the arguments advanced by the ld. DR and perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and CIT(A). It is an admitted fact that despite number of opportunities granted by the CIT(A), there was non-appearance before him for which he was constrained to pass an ex parte order sustaining the various additions

Assessing Officer. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore this matter to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to appear before the CIT(A) without seeking any adjournment under any pretext and substantiate its case, failing which the ld.CIT(A) is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

7.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. The decision was pronounced in the open court on 04.09.2019.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →