REETI SAHANI,NOIDA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7767/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 December 2019AY 2015-164 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT held that the CIT(A) has a duty to decide appeals on merits after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing and giving reasons for the decision. Dismissing appeals for non-prosecution without considering merits is an infirmity.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were decided ex parte by the CIT(A) without a proper hearing or consideration of the merits. The CIT(A) relied on case law to dismiss the appeals for non-prosecution.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal ex parte without deciding on merits and providing reasons. Whether sufficient opportunity of hearing was provided to the assessee.

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.

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

Before: MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA & Sh. N.K. BILLAIYA

For Appellant: CA यथ क ओर से /
Hearing: 19.12.2019Pronounced: 20.12.2019

आदेश आदेश / ORDER आदेश आदेश

PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM:

1.

This bunch of seven appeals filed by assessee are against order of CIT(A)-IV, Kanpur, dated 27/10/2017 relating to assessment years 2009-10 to 2015-16.

2.

The present bunch of appeals has been listed for hearing and we proceed to decide the same by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience.

3.

In this bunch of 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.

4.

The learned AR for the assessee pointed out 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.

5.

The learned DR for the Revenue on the other hand pointed out that sufficient opportunity has been afforded to the assessee.

6.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record. Under the provisions of Section 250(6) of the 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 appeal 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 facts and circumstances, where the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal 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 provide 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 bunch of appeals, we find that 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.

7.

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.

8.

Hence this bunch of appeals are restored back to the file of respective CIT(A)/s 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 all the appeals is thus decided in favour of assessee. Since the appeals are being decided on the preliminary issue we are not addressing the issue raised on merit.

9.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 20th day of December, 2019.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →