INABATA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. ACIT CIRCLE-12(1), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8364/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 November 2019AY 2016-173 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 found that the CIT(A) had not gone into the merits of the issues and it was incumbent upon the CIT(A) to decide the issues on merits. Therefore, the appeal was allowed and the matter was remitted back to the CIT(A).

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex parte by the CIT(A) without adjudicating on merits. The assessee requested that the appeal be allowed and restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex parte without adjudicating on merits. Whether the matter should be restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing on merits.

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: ‘FRIDAY-E’: NEW DELHI

Before: MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA & Sh. PRASHANT MAHARISHI

For Appellant: Adv ूयथ क ओर से /
For Respondent: Dr. V.K. Chandra, Sr. DR
Hearing: 15.11.2019Pronounced: 15.11.2019

आदेश / ORDER आदेश आदेश आदेश

PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM:

1.

The present Stay Application has been filed by the applicant against the stay of recovery of outstanding demand of Rs. 16,64,273/-.

S.A.No.-1020 /Del/2019 ITA No:- 8364/Del/2019] Assessment Year: 2016-17 2. During the course of the hearing of the stay application, the learned AR for the assessee pointed out that the appellate order was passed ex parte the applicant by the CIT(A) and the appeal has not been adjudicated on merits. He thus proposed that instead of granting any stay in the matter, the appeal of the applicant may be allowed and the matter be restored back to the file of the CIT(A).

3.

The learned DR for the Revenue fairly admitted that the CIT(A) has not adjudicated issues on merits.

4.

On the perusal of the record, we find that the CIT(A) while deciding the appeal of the applicant had posted the case for hearing on two different dates in the month of August, 2019. As none appeared on behalf of the applicant, the appeal was decided ex parte and was dismissed following the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharya (1997) 118 ITR 461 (SC) and CIT vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd as reported in 38 ITD 320 (Delhi). The CIT(A) has not been gone into the merits of the issues raised by the applicant. In the above said facts and circumstances, we find no merit in the order passed by the CIT(A). It is incumbent upon the CIT(A) to decide the issues on merits and not dismiss the appeal in limine.

Accordingly, we allow the appeal of the applicant and remit the issue back to the file of the CIT(A) who shall decide the issues raised after allowing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Consequently, the appeal filed by the applicant is allowed. Page | 2

S.A.No.-1020 /Del/2019 ITA No:- 8364/Del/2019] Assessment Year: 2016-17 5. Since the appeal has been restored back to the CIT(A), the stay application filed by the assessee is dismissed.

6.

In the result, stay application is dismissed and the appeal of the applicant is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 15th day of November, 2019.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →