ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI vs. NARESH KUMAR JAIN, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers

ITA 1755/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 April 2025AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, SHRI SUDHIR KUMAR (Judicial Member)2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found considerable cogency in the assessee's contention. Considering the factual matrix, the Tribunal was of the view that the interest of justice would be served by remitting the issues in dispute in both appeals back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for a fresh decision. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to provide an adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the Ld. CIT(A) in the proceedings. The Tribunal allowed both appeals for statistical purposes. No specific issue was left undecided; the entire matter was remitted.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Indus Airways Private Limited, filed appeals against the orders of the Ld. NFAC, New Delhi, for assessment years 2010-11 and 2012-13. The Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeals for both assessment years. The reason for dismissal was the assessee's failure to furnish proper details before the Assessing Officer (AO) and adequate documents before the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee's grounds of appeal relate to the dismissal of their appeals by the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee requested an opportunity to present their case before the Ld. CIT(A) by remitting the issues back for fresh consideration. The Revenue did not object to this proposal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the assessee's appeals for assessment years 2010-11 and 2012-13 without providing an opportunity to present proper details and documents. (Question of law and fact, relating to principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). Assessee's contention: The assessee argued that they did not get a proper opportunity to present their case before the Ld. CIT(A). They requested that the matters be remitted back to the Ld. CIT(A) for a fresh consideration, allowing them to canvass their case properly. No specific authorities or precedents were named in the judgment for this contention. Revenue's contention: The Ld. DR did not have any objection to the assessee's proposition of remitting the issues back to the Ld. CIT(A).

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “C”, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA,

For Respondent: Shri Dayainder Singh Sidhu, CIT(DR) &, Shri Om Prakash, Sr. D.R

Hearing: 24.03.2025Pronounced: 24.03.2025

ORDER

PER SHAMIM YAHYA, AM :

The Asessee has filed these Appeals against the separate Orders of the Ld. NFAC, New Delhi both dated 15.02.2024, relating to assessment years 2010-11 & 2012-13.

In both these cases, Ld. CIT(A) has noted that assesse has not filed proper details before the AO and he also noted that proper documents were not filed before the Ld. CIT(A), hence, he dismissed the appeals of the assessee. In this regard, Assessee has taken the ground nos. 4 & 6 in assessment year 2011-12 and ground no. 5 in assessment year 2011-12 respectively. Hence, Ld. AR pleaded that an opportunity may be given to the assessee to canvass the cases before the Ld. CIT(A) by remitting back the issues to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh consideration. Ld. DR did not have any objection to this proposition.

We have heard both the parties and perused the records. We find considerable cogency in the aforesaid contention of the Ld. AR. After considering the aforesaid factual matrix, we are of the considered view, that interest of justice will be served, if the issues in dispute in both the appeals are remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We hold and direct accordingly. The assessee through his Ld. AR is also directed to cooperate with the Ld. CIT(A) in the proceedings in the captioned appeals.

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 24.03.2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →