SHIKHA SEHGAL,PANIPAT vs. ITO,WARD - 4, PANIPAT

PDF · subscribers

ITA 465/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 November 2024AY 2013-14Bench: BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA (Accountant Member)4 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeals ex-parte without addressing the merits of the grounds of appeal. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to remand the matter back to the CIT(A) to hear and decide the appeals afresh on their merits, ensuring the assessee is provided with a proper opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged the orders of the CIT(A) for Assessment Years 2012-13 and 2013-14. The core contention was that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeals for non-prosecution without providing a proper opportunity of being heard and without deciding the appeals on their merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the assessee's appeals for non-prosecution ex-parte without providing a proper opportunity of being heard and without deciding the appeals on their merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’: NEW DELHI

Before: BEFORE SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. & SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA

Hearing: 20/11/2024Pronounced: 22/11/2024

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 464/Del/2024

ITA No. 465/Del/2024

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Assessee, the Assessee has challenged the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dated 18/12/2023 and 11/12/2023 for Assessment Years 2012-13 and 2013-14 respectively. As per Ground No. 6 and 7 of the Grounds of appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13 and 2013-14 respectively, the Assessee contended opportunity of being heard by the Ld. CIT(A).

The Ld. Departmental Representative by relying on the orders of the Lower Authorities, sought for dismissal of the Appeals.

Heard. We have gone through the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) in both the years, it is found that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the Appeal for non-prosecution as the Assessee has not appeared even after service of the notice. However, the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided the Appeals on its merit.

Considering the fact that the Appeals have been decided ex-parte and without deciding grounds of Appeal of the Assessee, we deem it fit to restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the issue involved in the present Appeals are remanded to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the Appeal afresh on its merit after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee in accordance with law. The Assessee is also directed to cooperate with the first appellate proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A).

Accordingly, the Ground No. 6 & 7 of the Appeal in and 465/Del/2024 respectively are allowed.

Since we have remanded the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide on merit, the other grounds of Appeal of the Assessee are dismissed.

In the result, Appeal filed by the Assessee in and 465/Del/2024 are partly allowed for statistical purpose.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →