Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘I.2’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI H. S. SIDHU & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI
ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM
This appeal is filed by assessee against the Order dated 31.8.2019 passed by the Ld. CIT(A-1), Noida relating to Assessment Year 2015-16.
Facts narrated by the revenue authorities are not disputed by both the parties, hence, the same are not repeated here for the sake of brevity.
During the hearing, Ld. counsel for the assessee has stated that Ld. CIT(A) has passed the ex-parte non-speaking order and that too without providing adequate opportunity of being heard and without observing the principle of natural justice. Therefore, he requested that the issues in dispute may be remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh, as per law after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and consider all the documents/evidences of the assessee.
On the other hand, Ld. DR relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and stated that Ld. CIT(A) has given various opportunities to the assessee, but the assessee remained non-cooperative and as a result thereof, the Ld. CIT(A) has no option but to dismiss the appeal of the assessee. But he has no objection for setting aside the issues in dispute to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the same afresh, subject to the condition that if this Bench directed the assessee through his counsel to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) to substantiate its claim on the fixed date and Ld. CIT(A) will not issue any notice to the assessee.
We have heard both the parties and perused the records as well as the relevant provisions of law, we are of the view that there is no doubt that assessee remained non-cooperative before the Ld. CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the exparte order, without discussing in detail the facts and circumstance of the case and also did not deal the issue on merit and passed a non-speaking order, which in our opinion, is not in accordance with the principles of natural justice and it is an erroneous approach. After reading Section 250(6) of the Act, we are also of the considered view that Assessee’s case should be decided on merits, which the Ld. CIT(A) has not done. However, it is a settled law that even an administrative order has to be speaking one. In this regard, we draw support from Hon’ble Apex Court in the case M/s Sahara India (Farms) Vs. CIT & Anr. in [2008] 300 ITR 403 wherein it has been held that even “an administrative order has to be consistent with the rules of natural justice”.
5.1 In the background of the aforesaid discussions and in the interest of justice as well as agreed by both the parties, we remit back the issues in dispute to the files of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for hearing on 16.09.2019 at 10.00 AM with the directions to consider each and every aspects of the issues involved in the Appeal and decide the same afresh, after considering all the evidences/documents and pass a speaking order. It is made clear that no notice for hearing will be issued by the Ld. CIT(A). Assessee is also directed through his Counsel to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) on 16.09.2019 at 10.00 AM for hearing to substantiate his case and file all the necessary documents before him and did not take any unnecessary adjournment in the case.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 13/08/2019.