ASHOK OBEROI,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2255/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 July 2018AY 2007-084 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) is required to decide appeals on merits and provide reasons, even if the assessee is unrepresented. The ex-parte dismissal without merit-based reasoning is unsustainable.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals against the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) were dismissed by the CIT(A) ex-parte due to non-appearance. The CIT(A) did not decide the appeals on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal ex-parte without deciding on merits and providing reasons. Whether the CIT(A) has complied with the requirements of Section 250(6) in its appellate order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271(1)(c),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI & SHRI O.P. KANT

Hearing: 03.07.2018Pronounced: 03.07.2018

PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M.

1.

All the appeals by the same assessee are directed against the different Orders of the Ld. CIT(A)-27, New Delhi, Dated 24.02.2016, for the A.Ys. 2007-2008, 2009-2010 and 2010-2011, challenging the levy of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act, 1961.

2 ITA.No.2255, 2257 & 2258/Del./2016 Shri Ashok Oberoi, New Delhi.

2.

The Ld. CIT(A), noted 04 dates of hearing, on which dates, notices through speed-post were addressed to the assessee and on that date the appeals were adjourned on the request of the assessee. However, on the last date of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee to argue the appeals and even no adjournment have been sent. The Ld. CIT(A), therefore, noted that assessee has nothing to say in the appeals.

The Ld. CIT(A) without passing the order on merit, upheld the order of the A.O. in ex-parte order. The appeals were dismissed being un-represented.

3.

After considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that the matter requires reconsideration at the level of the Ld. CIT(A). According to Section 250(6) of the I.T. Act, the Ld. CIT(A) is required to mention points for determination in the appellate order and reasons for decision thereon while deciding the appeals of the assessee. However, the impugned orders shows that the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeals of the assessee as the same remain un-represented from the side of the 3 ITA.No.2255, 2257 & 2258/Del./2016 Shri Ashok Oberoi, New Delhi.

assessee. Even if the assessee may not appear before him for disposal of the appeals, the Ld. CIT(A) is required to decide the appeals on merits, giving reasons for decision in the appellate order. Thus, the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) cannot sustain in Law.

The matter requires reconsideration at the level of the Ld. CIT(A).

4.

In this view of the matter, the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) are set aside in all the years and appeals of the assessee are restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to re-decide the appeals of the assessee on merits, giving reasons for decision as

per Law. The Ld. CIT(A) shall give reasonable, sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

5.

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court.

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 →