HEMLATA GAUTAM,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1(3), GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5912/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 September 2019AY 2009-105 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee was prevented by a sufficient cause from appearing before the CIT(A). Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside to give the assessee another opportunity to argue the appeal on merits.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 18,60,000/- under Section 69C of the Income Tax Act. The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A) on the final date of hearing due to illness, supported by a medical certificate.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order when the assessee was prevented by a sufficient cause (illness) from appearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES “SMC”: DELHI

Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI

Hearing: 29.08.2019Pronounced: 02.09.2019

This appeal by Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A), Aligarh, Dated 26.06.2018, for the A.Y. 2009-2010.

2.

In this case, the A.O. initiated the re-assessment proceedings because to verify financial transaction in S. B.

Account maintained with Nainital Bank. The A.O. passed the ex-parte assessment order and made the addition of Rs.18,60,000/- under section 69C of the I.T. Act and 2 ITA.No.5912/Del./2018 Smt. Hemlata Gautam, Ghaziabad. interest of Rs.29,225/- and computed taxable income at Rs.18,89,225/-. The assessee challenged both the additions before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) issued several notices for completion of the appellate proceedings. Initially, assessee sought adjournment, thereafter, none appeared on behalf of the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A). Lastly notice was issued on 11.06.2018 for 18.06.2018. On this date in the absence of appearance from the side of the assessee, appeal was partly allowed ex-parte.

3.

Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that assessee could not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) on the final date of hearing on 18.06.2018 due to her illness and advised complete bed rest by the Doctor from 15.06.2018 to 20.06.2018. Medical Certificate is filed. He has, therefore, submitted that due to the above reason, assessee could not appear before the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, the matter may be remanded to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh disposal of the appeal.

4.

The Ld. D.R. relied upon the impugned order and submitted that assessee did not make any compliance

3 ITA.No.5912/Del./2018 Smt. Hemlata Gautam, Ghaziabad. before the authorities below, therefore, Orders may be upheld.

5.

I have considered the rival submissions. On the last date of hearing on 18.06.2018, the assessee could not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) because of the illness which is supported by Medical Certificate. In these circumstances, it is clear that assessee was prevented by sufficient cause in not appearing before the Ld. CIT(A) on the date of hearing.

Therefore, one more chance could be given to the assessee to argue the appeal on merits. I, accordingly, set aside the Order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the appeal fo assessee to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to re-decide the appeal of assessee in accordance with Law, by giving reasonable, sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Assessee shall cooperate with the Ld. CIT(A) for finalisation of the appeal and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments.

6.

In the result, appeal of Assessee allowed for statistical purposes.

4 ITA.No.5912/Del./2018 Smt. Hemlata Gautam, Ghaziabad.

Order pronounced in the open Court.

More judgments on Section 69C

All 8,217 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →