PEGASUS MINERALS & METAL ALLOYS PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD -19(3), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2417/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 September 2019AY 2015-162 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) granted a very short adjournment, preventing the assessee from substantiating their claim. The assessee's counsel undertook to cooperate with the CIT(A) for a speedy disposal.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against an order passed by the CIT(A). The assessee contended that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without providing sufficient opportunity to substantiate their claim.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) provided adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee before passing an ex-parte order.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘SMC’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI H. S. SIDHU

ORDER This appeal is filed by assessee against the Order dated 25.01.2019 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-38, New Delhi relating to Assessment Year 2015-16.

2.

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.

3.

During the hearing, Ld. counsel for the assessee has stated that Ld. CIT(A) has not given sufficient opportunity to the assessee for substantiating the claim to the assessee and passed the exparte order without hearing the assessee. He further stated that assessee is having all the necessary evidences for substantiating the claim of the assesee. Hence, 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.

4.

On the contrary, Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the revenue authorities.

5.

I have heard both the parties and perused the records especially the orders of the revenue. No doubt that the assessee remained non- cooperative before the Ld. CIT(A), but I find that very short adjournment has been given by the Ld. CIT(A) to the assessee for which the assessee could not substantiate its claim. Even otherwise, assessee remained non- cooperative for appearance before the Ld. CIT(A). Ld. Counsel for the assessee undertakes to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) and will cooperate in speedy disposal of the appeal as well as not seek any unnecessary adjournment before the Ld. CIT(A). In the interest of justice, I set aside the issues in dispute to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for hearing on 26.11.2019 at 10.00 AM with the directions to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is made clear that no notice for hearing will be issued by the Ld. CIT(A). Assessee is also directed through its Counsel to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) on 26.11.2019 at 10.00 AM for hearing to substantiate her case and did not take any unnecessary adjournment in the case.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →