KAILASH STRUCTURALS LTD.,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 1(3), GHAZIABAD

ITA 1827/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 December 2019AY 2013-144 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) has a duty to decide appeals after hearing parties and providing reasons. Dismissing appeals for non-prosecution without considering merits, or passing orders without reasons, suffers from infirmity.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were decided ex-parte by the CIT(A) without sufficient opportunity of hearing and without going into the merits of the additions. The assessee was aggrieved by these ex-parte orders.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in deciding the appeals ex-parte without providing sufficient opportunity and without deciding on merits. Whether the CIT(A) order suffers from infirmity due to lack of reasoned order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT
223 ITR 480 · 1997 · HC
2,040 citing
CIT v. B.N. Bhattacharya & Another
118 ITR 461 · 1997 · SC
1,656 citing

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI

For Appellant: DR सुनवाई क तारख /

Hearing: 17.12.2019Pronounced: 18.12.2019

आदेश / ORDER आदेश आदेश आदेश

PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM: These appeals filed by assessee are against separate orders of CIT(A), Ghaziabad dated 01.03.2017, 01.03.2017 and 14.09.2017 relating to assessment years 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14 respectively.

In these appeals, the assessee is aggrieved by the order of CIT(A) for deciding the appeals ex-parte qua the assessee and without going into the merits of the addition.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee and we find 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 Ld.DR for the Revenue and perused the record.

Under the provisions of Section 250(6) of the Income tax Act, 1961 (in short “Act”), it is incumbent upon the CIT(A) to decide the appeals after hearing the parties and state the points for determination, the decision thereon and also the reasons for the decision. While deciding the appeals, CIT(A) has no power to dismiss the appeals 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 2

आयकर अपील सं. / 1813,1826 & 1827/Del/2018 facts and circumstances, where the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeals 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 appeals, we find that the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals ex-parte qua the assessee and had failed to decide the appeals by passing reasoned assessment 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 appeals are thus decided on this preliminary issue without going into the merits of the addition.

Hence these appeals are 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 these appeals are thus decided in favour of assessee. Since these appeals are being decided on the preliminary issue, we are not addressing the issue raised on merit.

आयकर अपील सं. / 1813,1826 & 1827/Del/2018

In the result, these appeals of the assessee are allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 18th day of December, 2019.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →