CANE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL,MEERUT vs. ITO WARD -1(2), MEERUT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 352/DEL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 August 2024AY 2013-14Bench: it against the intimation dated 14.03.2015 u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act'), by ACIT, CPC, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as the CPC).3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal ruled that the CIT(A) erred by not entering into the merits of the case. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, and the matter was remanded to the NFAC to reconsider the appeal on merits, providing due opportunity of hearing and considering relevant legal provisions.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed an intimation under Section 143(1) for AY 2013-14, having made a technical error by filing the ITR in Form ITR-7 instead of ITR-5. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without considering its merits, citing the assessee's non-response to notices.

What were the issues?

1. Whether a technical error in filing the ITR form (ITR-7 instead of ITR-5) warrants dismissal without merit adjudication. 2. Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal for non-response without addressing the substance of the case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES : B : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI M. BALAGANESH & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

For Appellant: Shri Ibad Mushtaq, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR
Hearing: 20.08.2024Pronounced: 27.08.2024

(Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ibad Mushtaq, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Ajay Kumar Arora, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 20.08.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 27.08.2024 ORDER

PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

1.

This appeal is preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 13.12.2022 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred as Ld. NFAC Ld. ‘FAA’) in Appeal No.CIT(A), Meerut/10027/2019-20 arising out of the appeal before it against the intimation dated 14.03.2015 u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’), by ACIT, CPC, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as the CPC).

2.

Heard and perused the record. The ld. AR has pointed out that there is only a technical mistake on the part of the assessee as instead of filing the return in ITR-5, the assessee had filed the return of income in ITR-7 and the judgement of the Calcutta Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Young Mens Welfare Society vs. ADIT (CPC), & 614/Kol/2022, order dated 01.05.2023 is relied to submit that this is merely a procedural lapse.

3.

However, we find that the ld.CIT(A) has not entered on the merits of the issue at all and, on the basis of the fact that the assessee was served notices on several occasions and the assessee has not responded, dismissed the appeal.

4.

Thus, we are inclined to allow the appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes by restoring the issue on merits to the files of the NFAC for deciding the appeal of the assessee on merits as well as question of law and after giving due opportunity of hearing and considering the relevant citation and law as relied.

5.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes only.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →