C H ROBINSON WORLDWIDE FREIGHT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT (OSD) CORPORATE RANGE - 1, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1913/CHNY/2019Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 October 2019AY 2010-113 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issues raised in the appeal to the file of the CIT(A) for re-adjudication on merits. This was done in the interest of justice, considering the ex-parte dismissal by the CIT(A).

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A). The assessee's authorized representative sought restoration of the appeal to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits, stating they had no objection if given an adequate opportunity of being heard.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) should be restored for fresh adjudication on merits.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO

Hearing: 15.10.2019Pronounced: 15.10.2019

आदेश / O R D E R

PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Chennai, in 18/C.I.T(A)-4/A.Y:2010-11 dated 22.04.2019 for the assessment year 2010-11.

2.

Mr.Vikram.V represented on behalf of the Assessee and Ms.R.Anita represented on behalf of the Revenue.

3.

It was submitted by the ld.AR that the ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of assessee by applying the principles laid in the case of C.I.T Vs. Multiplan (India) Private Ltd., reported in 38 ITD 320 (Delhi). It was a further submission that though the appeal had been posted for hearing on various occasions, the assessee’s authorized representative had appeared at most times and at some occasions, adjournments had been sought. The ld.AR has also filed an affidavit to the effect. It was a prayer that the assessee had no objection, if the issues raised in this appeal may be restored to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for adjudication on merits after giving assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.

4.

In reply, the ld.DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and the ld.CIT(A).

5.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. As it is noticed that the ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of assessee exparte, in the interest of justice, the issues raised in this appeal are restored to the file of ld.CIT(A) for re-adjudication on merits.

6.

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →