What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) should have decided the appeal on merits, even in the absence of the assessee, by providing reasons for the decision as required by Section 250(6) of the IT Act. Dismissing the appeal solely for non-prosecution was not sustainable.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte for non-prosecution after the assessee took adjournments. The assessee did not appear on the last date of hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution without deciding on merits and providing reasons, and whether an ex-parte dismissal is legally tenable.

M/S Himalayan Dairies Pvt. Ltd. vs ITO | ITAT Delhi 2019

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

Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI & SHRI B.R.R. KUMAR

Hearing: 13.08.2019Pronounced: 14.08.2019

This appeal by Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-4, New Delhi, Dated 17.03.2016, for the A.Y. 2009-2010.

We have heard the Learned Representative of both the parties.

2 ITA.No.2167/Del./2016 Himalayan Dairies Pvt. Ltd., Delhi. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) noted in the appellate order that assessee took adjournments in the matter and written submissions were filed at DAK. Thereafter appeal was further adjourned. However, on the last date of hearing, none appeared before him. Therefore, Ld. CIT(A), considering that assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal, dismissed the appeal of assessee ex-parte.

4. After considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that the matter requires reconsideration at the level of the Ld. CIT(A). According to Section 250(6) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the Ld. CIT(A) is required to mention point for determination and reasons for decision in his appellate order. Even if the assessee did not appear before Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) should have to decide the appeal on merits giving reasons for decision in the appellate order. However, the Ld. CIT(A) simply dismissed the appeal of assessee for non-prosecution. Therefore, the order cannot be sustained in law.

In view of the above, we set aside the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A)-4, New Delhi and restore the appeal of 3 ITA.No.2167/Del./2016 Himalayan Dairies Pvt. Ltd., Delhi. assessee to his file with a direction to re-decide the appeal of assessee in accordance with law, giving reasons for decision in the appellate order by giving reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

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

Order pronounced in the open Court.

M/S HIMALAYAN DAIRIES PVT. LTD.,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments