SCB STEEL P.LTD (EARLIER KNOWN AS CBS ENERGY SYSTEMS P.LTD),NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-5(2), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4574/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 September 2019AY 2009-103 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) failed to provide a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte without providing an opportunity of hearing. Notices issued by the CIT(A) were returned unserved, and it was unclear which address was used. However, the CIT(A) was aware of the assessee's email address.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred by deciding the appeal ex-parte without providing a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI ‘SMC’ BENCH,

Before: SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA

Hearing: 23.09.2019Pronounced: 24.09.2019

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the CIT(A)-33, New Delhi dated 21.02.2019 pertaining to A. Y. 2009-10.

2.

The first grievance of the assessee is that the CIT(A) failed to provide any opportunity of hearing and deciding the appeal exparte.

3.

Since this issue goes to the root of the matter I proceed to adjudicate upon this.

4.

Facts emanating from the order of the CIT(A) show that on two occasions the CIT(A) issued notice but the same were returned unserved. It is not coming out from the order of the CIT(A) on which address he issued notice. As per details given in form No.35 in the column address to which notice may be sent to the appellant address is mentioned as 20/17, Shakti Nagar, New Delhi -110007 also mobile number, email address of the appellant has been mentioned.

5.

I find that the address for correspondence is also mentioned in the order of the CIT(A) alongwith one another address. It is not known to which address the notice have been issued.

6.

Further I find that the order of the CIT(A) was served through e-mail which shows that the CIT(A) was well aware of the e-mail ID of the appellant.

7.

With these undisputed facts on record, in the interest of justice and fair play, I deem it fit to restore the appeal to the files of the CIT(A). The CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeal afresh after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

8.

In the result, the appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purpose.

The order is pronounced in the open court on 24.09.2019.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →