MADHUSUDAN CONSTRUCTIONS & INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- 15, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2504/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 August 2018AY 2006-073 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issue to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate their case. The CIT(A) is to decide the issue on merit after hearing the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to non-appearance, without a decision on merits. The assessee requested a final opportunity to present their case.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-appearance without deciding on merits, and if the assessee should be granted a final opportunity to be heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA

For Appellant: Shri Amit Sharma, CA
For Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr. DR

O R D E R

PER R. K. PANDA, AM :

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 22.12.2017 of CIT(A)- XXVI, New Delhi relating to assessment year 2006-07.

2.

Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, they all relate to the order of the ld. CIT(A) in confirming the penalty of Rs.12,06,345/- levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961.

3.

The ld. counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee on account of non-appearance and he has not decided the issue on merit. He submitted that in the interest of justice the assessee should be given one final opportunity to substantiate his case.

4.

The ld. DR on the other hand opposed the request of the ld. counsel for the assessee for restoration of the issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A) on the ground that despite three opportunities granted by the ld. CIT(A), the assessee sought adjournment on two occasions and did not bother to appear in one occasion.

5.

After considering the rival arguments made by both the sides and considering the fact that the ld. CIT(A) has not passed the order on merit and has simply dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee for non-appearance, I deem it proper to restore this issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case. The ld. CIT(A) shall decide the issue as per fact and law after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to appear before the ld. CIT(A) and not seek any adjournment under any pretext, failing which, the ld. CIT(A) is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. I hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on this 03rd August, 2018.

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →