What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee was prevented from arguing the appeal before the CIT(A) due to the counsel's illness. Therefore, the matter requires reconsideration at the CIT(A) level.

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed for non-prosecution after the CIT(A) rejected an adjournment request due to the illness of the main counsel. The assessee argued that the other representatives were not conversant with the case facts.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without granting a reasonable adjournment due to the counsel's illness.

Kiranwati, Gautam Budh Nagar vs ITO | ITAT Delhi 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES “SMC” : DELHI

Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI

Hearing: 10.07.2018Pronounced: 10.07.2018

Date of Hearing : 10.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 10.07.2018 ORDER

This appeal by assessee has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-1, Noida, dated 29.09.2017, for the A.Y. 2009-2010.

Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the assessee was represented by Shri S.C. Gupta & Co. before the 2 ITA.No.275/Del./2018 Smt. Kiranwati Gautam Budh Nagar. Ld. CIT(A) to sought adjournment due to illness of Shri S.C.

Gupta, Advocate. Ld. CIT(A), however, rejected the request for adjournment. Ultimately, because the Power of Attorney was filed in the name of three persons, the Ld. CIT(A) noted that assessee is not serious in prosecuting the case. In the absence of any representation from the side of the assessee, appeal of assessee has been dismissed.

After considering the rival submissions, I am of the view that the matter requires reconsideration at the level of the Ld. CIT(A). Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the other two Advocates with Shri S.C. Gupta are his family members and he was only conversant with the facts of the case and due to his illness there were no arguments raised from the side of the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A). He has submitted that one more chance may be given to the assessee to argue the appeal.

Considering the explanation of assessee, I am satisfied that assessee was prevented in arguing the appeal

3 ITA.No.275/Del./2018 Smt. Kiranwati Gautam Budh Nagar. before the Ld. CIT(A) through Counsel. The matter, therefore, requires reconsideration at the level of Ld. CIT(A). I, accordingly, set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the appeal of assessee to his file with a direction to redecide the appeal of assessee strictly on merits as per law, by giving reasonable, sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee and to the A.O.

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

Order pronounced in the open Court.

KIRANWATI,GAUTAM BUDH NAGAR vs. ITO, WARD- 2(1), NOIDA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments