Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2010-11, which sustained additions for unexplained credits and interest income on business FDR. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal in limine, stating the assessee failed to pursue it despite multiple opportunities, without deciding the issue on merits.
Held
The Tribunal held that the assessee deserved another opportunity to be heard on the merits of the additions. It directed the CIT(A) to provide an opportunity of hearing and decide the issue on merit as per law, instructing the assessee to make proper submissions and cooperate.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in limine without considering the merits of additions, and if the assessee should be granted a fresh opportunity of hearing.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘B’: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY & SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN
(Assessment Year : 2010-11) Godwin Hospitality Pvt. Ltd., vs. ACIT, Central Circle, 38, CMC, Chippi Tank, Meerut. Meerut – 250 001 (Uttar Pradesh). (PAN : ADCG3456A) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Rohit Agarwal, CA REVENUE BY : Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 19.11.2024 Date of Order : 19.11.2024 O R D E R
PER S.RIFAUR RAHMAN,AM:
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income-tax Appeals/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) (hereinafter referred to 'Ld. CIT (A)' dated 26.12.2023 for AY 2010-11.
At the time of hearing, ld. AR for the assessee brought to our notice that the ld. CIT (A) decided the issue against the assessee by observing that assessee has not pursued the appeal despite being granted several opportunities and the details are given in the first appellate order and by relying on several decisions, he dismissed the appeal in limine. He submitted that ld. CIT (A) has not decided the issue on merit and prayed that this issue may be remitted back to the ld. CIT(A) with the prayer to give an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. He submitted that there are reasons for assessee for not appearing before the first appellate authority.
On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue objected to the submissions of the ld. counsel for the assessee and submitted that assessee has not utilised several opportunities granted by ld. CIT (A).
Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We observed that the addition was sustained by the ld. CIT (A) on account of unexplained credits in the books and interest income on business FDR and considering the additions sustained by the ld. CIT (A), in our considered view, assessee should be given one more opportunity of being heard on merit. Therefore, we direct ld. CIT (A) to give an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and decide the issue on merit as per law. We also direct assessee to make proper submissions and appear before the ld.CIT (A) on the date of hearing and cooperate with the tax authorities. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.