ADHUNIK TECHNOLOGY PVT. LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S I.P. INDIA PVT. LTD.),NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-9, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7590/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 April 2019AY 2005-065 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 found that the CIT(A) did not provide a sufficient opportunity for hearing and directed the CIT(A) to decide the appeal afresh. The assessee's appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed in limine without a proper hearing. The CIT(A) had extracted the assessment order and dismissed the appeal stating the assessee did not press it, despite the assessee filing a paper book and attending proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in limine without providing a proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

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 ‘SMC’ BENCH,

Before: SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA

For Appellant: Shri V. Rajakumar, Adv
Hearing: 24.04.2019Pronounced: 26.04.2019

PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals] – XXV, New Delhi dated 31.10.2018 pertaining to A.Y 2005-06.

2.

The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee is that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in limine and thereby confirming the additions made by the Assessing Officer.

3.

Representatives of both the sides were heard at length and case records carefully perused.

4.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessment order dated 28.03.2013 is framed u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act']. Returned income of Rs. 99,750/- was assessed at Rs. 40,25,625/-.

5.

The first appellate authority, on page 2 of his order, has mentioned the issue of notice and date of hearing. From pages 3 to 9, he has simply extracted the entire assessment order and in the last para, he has mentioned that since the assessee chose not to press the appeal despite several opportunities, the appeal was decided as per facts on record and, accordingly, dismissed the appeal.

6.

Before me, the ld. AR stated that on 18.09.2018, the proceedings before the first appellate authority were attended and the appeal was adjourned to 23.10.2018. It is the say of the ld. AR that on 23.10.2018 a paper book containing 198 pages was filed and it was informed that the first appellate authority was not available and will be informed about the next date of hearing. The ld. AR stated that after that no intimation was given by the CIT(A) and the appeal was dismissed.

7.

I find that the CIT(A) did issue notice on several dates and the appeal was getting adjourned. However, on 18.09.2018, the appeal proceedings were attended and the case was adjourned and as per the statement of the ld. AR, paper book of 198 pages was filed on 23.10.2018, though there is no reference to such paper book in the appellate order.

8.

Be that as it may, I find it fit to restore this appeal to the file of the CIT(A). The CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeal afresh after giving reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

9.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in is allowed for statistical purposes.

The order is pronounced in the open court on 26.04.2019.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →