SANSAR SINGH,G B NAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-3(3), NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1664/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 December 2018AY 2009-104 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 restored the issue to the CIT(A)'s file, directing that a final opportunity be granted to the assessee to present their case. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-prosecution, despite a request for adjournment on medical grounds. The CIT(A) did not decide the appeal on its merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without deciding on merits, and if the assessee should be granted a final opportunity to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Not specified

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: SH. R.K. PAND

Hearing: 10/12/2018Pronounced: 10/12/2018

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 30.11.2017 passed by the CIT (A)-1, Noida relating to A. Y. 2009-10.

2.

Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, they all relate to the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) in sustaining the addition of Rs.25,46,000/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained cash deposit.

3.

After hearing both the sides, I find the case of the assessee was reopened on the basis of AIR information regarding huge deposit of cash in savings bank account of the assessee maintained with Oriental Bank of Commerce. Since, the assessee could not explain the source of such deposits to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer, he made addition of Rs.25,46,000/- to the total income of Rs.1,43,560/- returned by the assessee. The Assessing Officer accordingly determined the taxable income of the assessee at Rs.26,89,560/-. Since nobody appeared before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) in his ex-parte order dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee due to non prosecution.

4.

A careful observation and perusal of the order of the CIT(A) shows that the assessee vide letter dated 07.07.2017 sought adjournment on the ground that the assessee is not well for which he could not prepare the papers. However, the Ld. CIT (A) held that this is not a valid reason for seeking adjournment and that assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal filed by it. He accordingly dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee for non prosecution. However, he has not decided the appeal on merit. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice I deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case and decide the appeal on merit as per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to appear before the CIT(A) and explain his case without seeking any adjournment under any pretext failing which the Ld. CIT(A) shall pass appropriate order as per law. I hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purpose.

6.

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

The order was pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing itself i.e. on 10.12.2018.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →