M/S. CUE APPARELS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3430/DEL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 November 2017AY 2006-072 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) failed to pass a reasoned order as required by Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, even in case of default. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) was not sustainable in law.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed in default due to non-appearance. The assessee challenged the subsequent penalty levied under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) is required to pass a reasoned order even when the assessee defaults in appearing for the appeal hearing. Whether the dismissal of the appeal in default by the CIT(A) without a reasoned order is legally valid.

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 BENCH “B”, NEW DELHI

Before: SH. BHAVNESH SAINI & SH. L. P. SAHU

Hearing: 13.11.2017
1.

This appeal by assessee has been directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)–VI, New Delhi, dated 20.03.2014 for assessment year 2006-07, challenging the levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act.

2.

Ld. CIT(A) noted in the impugned order that various notices have been issued to the assessee for hearing of the appeal. However, the appeal was adjourned many times on the request of the assessee’s counsel. On the last date of hearing none attended appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, dismissed the appeal of the assessee in default.

3.

After considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that the matter requires reconsideration at the level of Ld. CIT(A). According to section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, Ld. CIT(A) is required to pass reasoned order by mentioning point for determination in the order and reasons for decisions. Even if, the assessee did not appear before him for disposal of the appeal, Ld. CIT(A) is required to pass reasoned order by mentioning point for determination in the impugned order. Thus, Section 250(6) of the Act have been violated, therefore, order of Ld. CIT(A) cannot be sustained in law. The matter requires reconsideration at the level of the Ld. CIT(A).

4.

In view of the above discussions, we set aside the order of the authorities below and restore the appeal of the assessee to his file with direction to re-decide the appeal of the assessee on merit giving reasons for decision in the appeallate order by giving reasonable sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 13.11.2017. Sd/- Sd/- (L. P. SAHU) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date: 13.11.2017 @m!t

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 →