Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘C’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI H. S. SIDHU & SHRI L.P. SAHU
ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM This appeal is filed by assessee against the Order dated 21.12.2016 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-4, New Delhi relating to Assessment Year 2012-13 on the following grounds:-
“1. That under the facts and circumstances, no proper and reasonable opportunity of hearing has been provided by Ld. CIT(A).
2. That under the facts and circumstances,
the case could not be attended before Ld.
CIT(A) for reasonable cause.
That without prejudice, Ld. CIT(A) erred
in law in not deciding the appeal on merits and erred in dismissing the same without adjudicating the issue by assuming that the assessee is not interested in pursuing the matter.
4. That under the facts and circumstances,
the AO grossly erred in law as well as on merits in allowing depreciation on civil construction cost for installation of ETP plants at Rs. 4,70,094/- @10% only against correctly claimed at Rs. 47,00,938/- @100%, thus, erred in not allowing the depreciation to the extent of Rs. 42,30,844/-.”
Facts narrated by the revenue authorities are not disputed by both the parties, hence, the same are not repeated here for the sake of brevity.
3. At the time of hearing, Ld. Counsel of the Assessee draw our attention towards the impugned order and stated that Ld. CIT(A) has not given sufficient opportunity for substantiating the claim of the assessee and decide the case exparte, which is contrary to the principles of natural justice. He requested that the impugned order may be cancelled and the issue in dispute may be set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh, under the law, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard. He further stated that assessee is ready to argue the case and requested the Bench to fix the date of hearing before the Ld. CIT(A) and also undertakes to appear before him and will not take any unnecessary adjournment.
On the contrary, Ld. DR has not raised any serious objection on the request of the Ld. Counsel of the assessee.
We have heard both the parties and perused the records, especially the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). After examining the impugned order, we are of the considered view that Ld. CIT(A) has passed the exparte order and did not provide sufficient opportunity, as a result thereof, the assessee could not substantiate its case before the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, in the interest of justice, we set aside the issues in dispute to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with the directions to decide the same afresh, under the law, after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. However, to save time, we are directing the assesssee through his counsel to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) on 11.12.2017 at 10.00 AM for substantiating its case by producing all the evidences before him and will not take any unnecessary adjournment. There is no need to issue the notice to the parties, because this order has been pronounced in the Open Court.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 07/11/2017.