SHALEEN AGENCIES PVT LTD,KAROL BAGH vs. ITO WARD - 23(1), DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1101/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 July 2019AY 2014-153 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 restored the issue to the file of the CIT(A) to grant the assessee one more opportunity to present its case, emphasizing the interest of justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex parte for non-prosecution due to a change of address. The Assessing Officer had made a significant addition to the assessee's income.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex parte without affording the assessee an opportunity to be heard due to a change of address.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH : SMC : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R.K. PANDA

For Appellant: Shri Anup Mehta, CA
For Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr.DR
Hearing: 15.07.2019Pronounced: 15.07.2019

BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shaleen Agencies Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ITO, Shop No.404, 4th Floor, Ward-23(1), 2633, 2634, Plot No.249-250, Delhi. Bank Street, Karol Bagh, Delhi. PAN: AARCS0334F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Anup Mehta, CA Revenue by : Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 15.07.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 15.07.2019 ORDER

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the ex parte order dated 29th June, 2018 of the CIT(A)-8, New Delhi, relating to Assessment Year 2014-15. The assessee in its various grounds of appeal has challenged the ex parte order of the CIT(A) in dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee and thereby sustaining the various additions made by the Assessing Officer.

2.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a company and was engaged in the business of trading of gold jewellery. It filed its return of income on 30th September, 2014 declaring the total income of Rs.74,720/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) on 30th December, 2016 determining the total income at Rs.17,81,300/- wherein he made GP addition of Rs.17,06,579/-. Since nobody appeared before him, the ld.CIT(A) in the ex parte order passed by him, sustained the addition made by the Assessing Officer.

3.

Aggrieved with such order of the CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

4.

The ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that due to change of address by the assessee, the notice issued by the office of the CIT(A) for hearing of the appeal was not received for which nobody could appear before him. He submitted that in the interest of justice the assessee should be given an opportunity to represent its case.

5.

The ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the order of the CIT(A) and opposed the arguments advanced by the assessee.

6.

I have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that the ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, I deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case. The assessee is also hereby directed to appear before the CIT(A) and substantiate its case. The CIT(A) shall decide the issue as per fact and law after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. I hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly, allowed for statistical purposes.

7.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. The decision was pronounced in the open court on 15.07.2019.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →