DAVINDER KALRA,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-41(5), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5069/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 September 2019AY 2014-154 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) should have decided the appeal on merits with reasons, even in the absence of the assessee, instead of dismissing it for non-prosecution. The impugned order was set aside.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 12,56,042/- on account of unexplained credit under Section 68. The assessee did not appear before the CIT(A) despite notices, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred by dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without deciding on merits and providing reasons, as required by Section 250(6).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES “SMC”: DELHI

Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI

Hearing: 21.08.2019Pronounced: 02.09.2019

This appeal by Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-31, New Delhi, Dated 31.05.2018, for the A.Y. 2014-2015.

2.

In this case the A.O. made the addition of Rs.12,56,042/- on account of unexplained credit under section 68 of the I.T. Act. The assessee, however, did not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) despite issue of several notices.

2 ITA.No.5069/Del./2018 Shri Davinder Kalra, New Delhi.

The Ld. CIT(A) in view of these facts confirmed the addition and dismissed the appeal of assessee.

3.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite notifying the date of hearing through registered post.

4. I have heard the Ld. D.R. and perused the findings of the authorities below.

5.

According to Section 250(6) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the Ld. CIT(A) is required to mention point for determination and reasons for decision in his appellate order. Even if the assessee did not appear before Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) should have to decide the appeal on merits giving reasons for decision in the appellate order. However, the Ld. CIT(A) simply dismissed the appeal of assessee for non- prosecution. Therefore, the order cannot be sustained in law.

6.

In view of the above, I set aside the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A), New Delhi and restore the appeal of assessee to his file with a direction to re-decide the appeal of assessee in accordance with law, giving reasons for decision

3 ITA.No.5069/Del./2018 Shri Davinder Kalra, New Delhi. in the appellate order by giving reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

4.

In the result, appeal of assessee allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →