BALVINDER,KARNAL vs. ITO, WARD- 1, KARNAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 13/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 June 2019AY 2011-123 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 ITAT held that the CIT(A) order was not sustainable in law as it failed to decide the appeal on merits and provide reasons for the decision. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for re-adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) for non-appearance, despite the tribunal noting that the CIT(A) should have decided the appeal on merits. The assessee had not made any submissions before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal solely for non-prosecution without deciding the merits of the case and providing reasons for the decision.

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 “SMC”: DELHI

Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI

Hearing: 04.06.2019Pronounced: 04.06.2019

This appeal by Assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A), Karnal, Dated 31.10.2018 for the A.Y. 2011-2012.

2.

The Ld. CIT(A) noted that assessee has not made any appearance despite giving various opportunities. The Ld. CIT(A), therefore, noted that assessee has nothing to add or submission in respect of the additions made by the A.O.

2 ITA.No.13/Del./2019 Mr. Balvinder, Karnal. The Ld. CIT(A), accordingly, dismissed the appeal of assessee.

3.

I have heard the Learned D.R. and perused the Orders of the authorities below.

4.

After considering the submissions of the Ld. D.R. I am of the view that the matter requires reconsideration at the level of the Ld. CIT(A). According to Section 250(6) of the I.T. Act, 1961, the Ld. CIT(A) is required to mention point for determination and reasons for decision in his appellate order. Even if the assessee did not appear before Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) should have to decide the appeal on merits giving reasons for decision in the appellate order. However, the Ld. CIT(A) simply dismissed the appeal of assessee for non-prosecution. Therefore, the order cannot be sustained in law.

5.

In view of the above, I set aside the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A), Karnal and restore the appeal of assessee to his file with a direction to re-decide the appeal of assessee in accordance with law, giving reasons for decision

3 ITA.No.13/Del./2019 Mr. Balvinder, Karnal. in the appellate order, by giving reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

6.

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open Court.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →