MR. AMIT GUPTA,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1209/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 July 2019AY 2010-113 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 the CIT(A) should have decided the appeal on merits even in the absence of the assessee, and that the dismissal violated principles of natural justice and Section 250(6) of the IT Act. The order was set aside and the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for re-adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to non-compliance and lack of response to notices. The assessee claimed that notices were not served due to a change of address.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order dismissing the appeal for non-appearance without deciding on merits is valid and whether it violates principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI

Hearing: 02.07.2019Pronounced: 03.07.2019

This appeal by Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-12, New Delhi, Dated 28.06.2019, for the A.Y. 2010-2011.

2.

The Ld. CIT(A) noted that assessee has challenged the addition of Rs.98,60,470/- on account of cash deposit. Notice was issued to the assessee for hearing of the appeal.

2 ITA.No.1209/Del./2017 Mr. Amit Gupta, Delhi However, no compliance was made. Later on Counsel for Assessee sought adjournment. Thereafter, fresh notices were issued to the assessee but no compliance was made. Notice sent for 19.01.2016 returned un-served with the remarks “Left” by the postal authorities. The Ld. CIT(A) sent another notice but same were also not responded by the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A), therefore, noted that assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal, therefore, appeal of assessee were dismissed.

3.

After considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that the matter requires reconsideration at the level of the Ld. CIT(A). Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that due to change of address, notice could not be served upon the assessee. This fact is borne out from the address given in the appeal papers. Further, the Ld. CIT(A), even if assessee did not appear before him, shall have to pass the order on merits, giving reasons for decision in the appellate order. Thus, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is violative of principles of natural justice and that the same also violates Section 250(6) of the I.T. Act, 1961. We,

3 ITA.No.1209/Del./2017 Mr. Amit Gupta, Delhi accordingly, set aside the impugned order and restore the appeal of assessee to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to re-decide the appeal of assessee as per Law, by giving reasonable, 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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →