M/S. PRETTY EXPORTS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3941/DEL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 September 2018AY 2003-043 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal decided to grant the assessee one more opportunity to appear before the CIT(A) and present their case properly. The matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits after providing a fair hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order. The assessee had submitted some evidence before the CIT(A) which was admitted, but the assessee was not properly represented.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order and whether the assessee should be given another opportunity to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE

Hearing: 13.09.2018Pronounced: 17.09.2018

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 27/01/2014 passed by CIT (A)-XVI1, New Delhi for Assessment Year 2003-04.

2.

The grounds of appeal are as under:-

“1. Because the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XVII, New Delhi has erred in law and on facts, by passing the order u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2. Because the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XVII, New Delhi has erred in law and on facts, by wrongly making an addition of Rs.25,00,000/- as unsecured loan.

3.

Because the appellant craves for the indulgence of the Hon'ble Court so as to permit it to raise additional ground/grounds of appeal and/ or to verify or modify the grounds already taken.

4. Because the order appealed against is contrary to the facts, law and principles of natural justice.”

3. At the time of hearing none appeared for the assessee. Therefore, we are proceeding with the appeal memo. From the perusal of the order of the CIT(A), it is found that the order of the CIT(A) is ex-parte. The assessee filed certain evidences before the CIT(A) which was admitted by the CIT(A) under Rule 46A, but the assessee was not represented properly before the CIT(A). Therefore, in the interest of justice, we are inclined to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to remain present before the CIT(A) and properly plead the case before the CIT(A). If the assessee fails to appear before the CIT(A), then the CIT(A) should proceed with the documents filed by the assessee and decide the issue on merit after thoroughly verifying the documents. Thus, we are remanding back this matter before the CIT(A) to decide the issue after giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee by following principles of natural justice.

4.

In result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →