DWARKA PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-7(4), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5522/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 May 2019AY 2004-054 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee had not complied with notices, but considering substantial injustice, decided to grant one more opportunity. The case was remitted back to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits after hearing the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte without a decision on merits. The assessee argued that the CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order and requested the case be set aside for a decision on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without deciding the appeal on merits, and if the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present its case.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES: ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI T.S. KAPOOR

Hearing: 23/05/2019Pronounced: 23/05/2019

ORDER This is an appeal filed by assessee against the order of Ld.CIT(A)-3, Delhi dated 02.07.2018 pertaining to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2004-05.

2.

At the time of hearing the Ld.A.R. submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) had passed ex-parte order without deciding the issue on merits. Therefore, it was prayed that the appeal should be set aside to Ld.CIT(A) for deciding on merits of the case.

Dwarka Properties Pvt.Ltd. New Delhi 3. Ld.Sr.D.R. though supported the order of Ld.CIT(A), but had no serious objection to remitting back the matter to Ld.CIT(A).

4.

I have heard the parties and have gone through the material placed on record.

5. I find that the first notice to assessee was issued on 14.06.2017 and the date of appeal was fixed for hearing on 13.07.2017 and on application by Ld.Counsel of assessee the appeal was adjourned to 08.09.2017 on which date nobody attended and the appeal was fixed for hearing on 18.12.2017 and finally on 09.04.2018. It is seen that despite these various notices assessee did not comply with the notices, but keeping in view the substantial injustice, I am of the considered opinion that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to present it’s case before Ld.CIT(A). Therefore, I remit the case to Ld.CIT(A) who shall pass the order after hearing the assessee. The assessee also is directed to present itself before Ld.CIT(A) within reasonable period of time and should not seek unnecessary adjournments.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →