Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU
This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order dated 25.5.2018 of the Ld. CIT(A)-12, New Delhi relating to assessment year 2014-15 on the following grounds:-
I) That the appeal order passed by Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law and is not based on facts.
II) That the Ld. CIT(A) has not given proper opportunity to the appellant to present his case.
III) That without prejudice to above mandatory e-filing of appeal has not been stipulated in section 246/249/250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
IV) That even otherwise too, the appeal could not be filed electronically on account of lack of legal knowledge / advice involving no deliberate default on the part of appellant.
V) That the additions made by AO are bad in law and are not based on facts.
VI) That the appellant craves leave to modify/ amend or add any one or more grounds.
Facts narrated by the revenue authorities are not disputed by both the parties, hence, the same are not repeated here for the sake of convenience.
Ld. Counsel of the assessee stated that Ld. CIT(A) has not given proper opportunity to assessee to present his case; passed the exparte order and dismissed the appeal of the assessee without pointing out any defect in the appeal. Hence, he requested that the issues in dispute may be set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh on merits and pass a speaking order thereon, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
On the other hand, Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below.
After hearing both the parties and perusing the impugned order, I am of the view that Ld. CIT(A) has passed the exparte order without discussing in detail the facts and circumstances of the case and also did not deal the issue on merit and passed a non-speaking order by dismissing the appeal of the assessee without pointing out any defect in the impugned order. However, it is a settled law that even an administrative order has to be speaking one.
5.1 In this regard, I draw support from Hon’ble Apex Court in the case M/s Sahara India (Farms) Vs. CIT & Anr. in [2008] 300 ITR 403 wherein it has held that even “an administrative order has to be consistent with the rules of natural justice”.
In the background of the aforesaid discussions and respectfully following the precedent, as aforesaid, I remit back the issues in dispute to the files of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to point out the defect, if any, specifically and then consider each and every aspects of the issues involved in the Appeal and decide the same afresh and pass a speaking order by consider all the evidences/documents. Needless to add that the assessee should be given adequate opportunity of being heard. However, the Assessee is directed to file all the evidences/documents etc. before him to substantiate his case and rectify the defect, if any, to be pointed out by the ld. CIT(A). Assessee is also directed not to take any unnecessary adjournment in the proceedings.