CHANDER BHAN SHARMA,FARIDABAD vs. ITO WARD 1(2), FARIDABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A)'s order was ex-parte and directed the assessee to appear before the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication. The stay application was dismissed, but the main appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed a stay application seeking a stay on an outstanding demand of Rs. 15,21,660/-. The Assessing Officer's order was passed under Section 144 read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, and the CIT(A)'s order was ex-parte.
What were the issues?
Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) without affording sufficient opportunity to the assessee is valid, and the grant of stay on the outstanding demand.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
ORDER Assessee has filed this Stay Application for grant of stay on the outstanding demand of Rs. 15,21,660/-.
I have heard both the parties on the Stay Application. In my considered view, the assessee could not establish the case for grant of stay on the outstanding demand in dispute and also he is not ready to make any payment as a condition for grant of outstanding demand in dispute. I have also seen the impugned order passed by the ld. First Appellate Authority, which is an exparte order without hearing and giving sufficient opportunity to the assessee and even otherwise the order passed by the AO is also u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “Act”) read with section 147 of the Act. Both the parties agreed that the Stay Application filed by the assessee may be dismissed and the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is exparte without giving sufficient opportunity 1 to the assessee and therefore, the issue in dispute may be set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same as per law, afresh.
Keeping in view of the facts and circumstances of the present case, there is no doubt that Ld. First Appellate Authority has given various opportunities to the assessee, but the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) have returned back various times. Therefore, in view of non-service of notice upon the assessee, I deem it fit to direct the Assessee through his counsel to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) on 01.08.2019 at 10.00 AM to represent his case and Ld. CIT(A) is also directed to decide the issues in dispute after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result, the Stay Application No. 721/Del/2019 is dismissed and the Main (AY 2010-11) is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 08th day of July, 2019.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S. Sikka Motors PVT LTD vs. Union Of INDIA & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shri Yaras Suresh Babu Prabhu Kumar vs. The Union Of INDIATelangana · 27 Oct 2026
- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026