PRIYANKA GARG,MEERUT vs. ITO, WARD- 2(1), MEERUT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 49/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 July 20183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee was prevented by a sufficient cause from appearing before the CIT(A). The appeal was not decided on merits, and therefore, it requires reconsideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed due to non-appearance on four hearing dates. The assessee's counsel was undergoing surgery during that period and could not file for adjournment.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was prevented by a sufficient cause from appearing before the CIT(A) and if the appeal should be decided on merits.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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), Meerut, dated 07.12.2017, for the A.Y. 2009-2010.

2.

After considering the rival submissions, I am of the view that the matter requires reconsideration at the level of the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) noted four dates of hearing in the appellate order, on which date, none attended before him on 2 ITA.No.49/Del./2018 Smt. Priyanka Garg, Meerut. behalf of the assessee. The hearing took place within one month on all the four dates of hearing. Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that since he was operated upon when the case were taken-up for hearing before Ld. CIT(A), therefore, he could not move adjournment petition before him and submitted that assessee would not repeat the same mistake. Therefore, matter may be remanded to the Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the appeal of assessee on merits.

3.

The Ld. D.R. did not dispute that matter may be remanded to the Ld. CIT(A) in such circumstances.

4.

Considering the above facts, I am satisfied that assessee was prevented by sufficient cause in not appearing before the Ld. CIT(A). Further, the appeal of assessee has not been decided on merits because it was disposed off in the absence of the assessee. The matter, therefore, requires reconsideration at the level of the Ld. CIT(A). I, accordingly, set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the appeal of assessee to his file for decision afresh in accordance

3 ITA.No.49/Del./2018 Smt. Priyanka Garg, Meerut. with law, by giving reasonable, sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

5.

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

Order pronounced in the open Court.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →