M/S. JAMINI EXPORTS,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2842/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 November 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 a reasonable opportunity of hearing should be provided to the assessee as per the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the matter was set aside to the AO for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was decided ex parte by the CIT(A) and the assessment order was passed under section 144 of the Act. The assessee contended that its director was in judicial custody and thus, an adequate opportunity of being heard was not provided.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was provided with a reasonable opportunity of being heard before the authorities below passed their orders.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA & SHRI R.K. PANDA

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta &
For Respondent: Ms. Deepali Chandra, C.A
Hearing: 25.11.2019Pronounced: 29.11.2019

आदेश / ORDER आदेश आदेश आदेश

PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM:

1.

The present appeal filed by assessee is against the order of CIT(A)-I, Noida, dated 11.11.2016 relating to Assessment Year 2009-10 against the आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No:- 2842/Del/2017 order passed under section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).

2.

The present appeal has been decided ex parte by the CIT(A). We also find that the assessment order has been passed by the AO under section 144 of the Act. The issue needs to be decided on merits. The case of the assessee before us is that no adequate opportunity of being heard was allowed to the assessee as on the date the orders were passed by the authorities below, the Director Mr. Sarvottam Mukesh Sahgal was in judicial custody at the relevant time. The learned AR for the assessee pointed out that the said Director is now free.

3.

In the totality of facts and circumstances, we are of the view that for deciding the appeal of the assessee reasonable opportunity of hearing should be provided to the assessee, as is the dictate of principles of natural justice. In view thereof, we set aside the issue on merits to the file of AO to decide in accordance with law after allowing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

4.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 29th day of November, 2019.

Sd/- Sd/- (R.K. PANDA) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) लेखा सदःय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �याियक सदःय लेखा सदःय �याियक सदःय/JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सदःय लेखा सदःय �याियक सदःय �याियक सदःय �द�ली �द�ली / �दनांक Dated: 29th November, 2019 �द�ली �द�ली SH Page | 2

आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No:- 2842/Del/2017

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →