EVERSHINE INFRADEVELOPERS P.LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-8(4), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2973/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 September 2019AY 2015-162 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that the CIT(Appeals) failed to comply with Section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act by not providing reasons for the decision and not adjudicating the merits. The impugned order was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(Appeals) was dismissed ex-parte due to the assessee's absence. The CIT(Appeals) did not discuss the merits of the grounds of appeal raised.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Appeals) properly adjudicated the appeal by discussing the merits, or if an ex-parte dismissal without such discussion is valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL

Before: SHRI G.S. PANNU

For Appellant: Shri T.R. Talwar, Advocate
For Respondent: Ms. Ekta Vishnoi, Senior DR
Hearing: 24.09.2019Pronounced: 24.09.2019

ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER

This appeal by the assessee for the assessment year 2015-16 is directed against the order of learned CIT(A)-3, New Delhi dated 13th February, 2019.

2.

In this appeal, the first grievance of the assessee is against the action of the CIT(Appeals) in disposing of the appeal ex-parte noticing the absence of the assessee, without discussing the merits of the Grounds of appeal raised before him.

3. I find ample potency in the grievance of the assessee inasmuch as Section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) directs the Commissioner (Appeals) to dispose of the appeal before him in writing stating the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for such decision. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the approach adopted by the CIT(Appeals) is 2 ITA-2973/Del/2019 inconsistent with the requirements of Section 250(6) of the Act. In fact, the CIT(A) has summarily dismissed the appeal of the assessee noticing the absence of the assessee, without adjudicating the merits of the dispute before him. Therefore, on this point itself, the impugned order of the CIT(Appeals) is unsustainable and is accordingly set aside.

4.

The matter is restored back to the file of the CIT(Appeals) who shall de-novo adjudicate the appeal of the assessee in accordance with law after allowing the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

5.

In the result, without going into the merits of the issue involved, the appeal is disposed of as above.

Above decision was dictated and pronounced in the open Court on 24th September, 2019 at the conclusion of the hearing in the presence of both the parties.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →