Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘C’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘C’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.4084/Del/2017 ITA Nos.486,487 & 4829/Del/2018 Stay Application Nos.323 to 326/Del/2019 Assessment Years: 2012-13 to 2015-16 Hilizer Borden Education Centre, vs ACIT(Exemption), 117/K/30, Sarvodaya Nagar, Ghaziabad. Kanpur. PAN: AAATH5414P Appellant Respondent Assessee by Shri Rakesh Garg, Advocate Revenue by Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 02.4.2019 Date of Pronouncement 03.4.2019 ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JM Challenging the orders of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Kanpur (“Ld. CIT(A)”) assessee filed ITA Nos. 4084/Del/2017, 486/Del/2018, 487/Del/2018 and 4829/Del/2018 in respect of the assessment years 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16, and pending disposal of these appeals, assessee filed stay petitions seeking stay of demand for all these years.
At the time of hearing of the stay petitions, it is submitted by the Ld. AR that the Ld. CIT(A) passed the impugned orders ex parte on the ground that the assessee did not show any interest in prosecuting the matter but to reach this conclusion, Ld. CIT(A) referred to the issuance of certain notices which have never been received by the assessee. On this score, Ld. AR seeks stay of the demand. At the same time, it is submitted by Ld. AR that the Ld. CIT(A) did not advert to the merits of the case and therefore the impugned order also cannot be sustained and it may also be necessary to consider the need to remand the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to pass the order on merits. In this factual situation both the parties submitted that instead of proceeding with the stay petitions, it would be just and convenient to hear and dispose of the appeals themselves. We accept this proposal and proceed to look into the appeals. 3. We have gone through the record. It could be seen from the impugned orders, Ld. CIT(A) drew an inference that the assessee does not seem to have any interest in proceeding with the appeals to get them disposed of on merits inasmuch as the assessee does not respond to the notices issued for hearing of the matter. In none of the appeals Ld. CIT(A) made a reference to the merits of the case, though he recorded that he decided to dispose of the appeals on the basis of the material available on record. He simply recorded, without going into the merits, that he had no reason to interfere with the stand taken by the learned Assessing Officer. 4. What is recorded by the ld. CIT(A) is the conclusion but not the reasoning. Reasoning is the lifeblood of any order of the judicial or quasi- judicial authority so as to enable the appellate authorities to verify the soundness of the reasoning to decide whether any interference by the
appellate authorities is warranted. Ld. CIT(A) merely recorded the conclusions but does not record the reasons, and therefore, it is not available on record whether the reasons are proper or perverse. Impugned orders do not help this Tribunal to make an evaluation of the merits of the case. 5. We, therefore, find it difficult to sustain the impugned orders and for disposal on merits by recording reasons, it is necessary to set aside the impugned orders and to remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). While directing accordingly, we allow the appeals for statistical purpose. 6. In view of disposal of the appeals, stay applications become infructuous and are accordingly dismissed. 7. In the result, whereas appeals of the assessee for all the four years are allowed for statistical purposes, Stay Applications are dismissed being infructuous. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 3rd April, 2019. Sd/- sd/- (N.K. BILLAIYA) (K. NARASIMHA CHARY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 3rd April, 2019 VJ Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) DR: ITAT 5. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI
Draft dictated on 02.04.2019 Draft placed before author 02.04.2019 Draft proposed & placed before the second member Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Kept for pronouncement on Date of uploading order on the website File sent to the Bench Clerk Date on which file goes to the AR Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk. Date of dispatch of Order.