HARDEEP SINGH,KARNAL vs. ITO, WARD-2, KARNAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 439/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 June 2019AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT held that the CIT(A) order dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without deciding on merits and providing reasons is not sustainable in law. 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 CIT(A) having the power to decide on merits. The assessee did not appear before the CIT(A) despite opportunities. The ITAT noted that the CIT(A) failed to provide reasons for the decision in the appellate order.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution without deciding on merits and providing reasons. Whether the CIT(A) order is sustainable if it lacks specific points for determination and reasons for 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 15.11.2018 for the A.Y. 2015-2016.

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.439/Del./2019 Mr. Hardeep Singh, 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.439/Del./2019 Mr. Hardeep Singh, Karnal. in the appellate order, by giving reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

6.

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 →