What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(A) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to present its case. The assessee was directed not to seek adjournments.

The assessee company declared nil income with a short-term capital loss. The AO made additions, and the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex parte due to the assessee's non-appearance. The assessee's counsel cited the advocate's illness as the reason for non-appearance.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A) after an ex parte order was passed due to non-appearance.

Modern Info Technology Pvt. Ltd… vs ITO | ITAT Delhi 2017

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘SMC’, NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R.K.PANDA

Hearing: 25.09.2017

ORDER Per R.K.Panda, AM:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20th February, 2017 of the CIT(A)- 38, New Delhi relating to assessment year 2013-14.

The ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that the assessee is a private limited company and filed its return of income on 23rd September, 2013 declaring nil income. However, assessee has declared short term capital loss of Rs. 25,03,126/-. The AO completed the assessment on a total income of Rs. 4,21,204/- by making disallowance of certain expenses. He submitted that due to non- appearance before the CIT(A), he passed an ex parte order dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee. He submitted that due to illness of the 2 (Maha Seer Infrastructure P. Ltd.) concerned advocate, he could not appear before the CIT(A). The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be given an opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A). He accordingly submitted that this matter may be restored to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the issue afresh after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

The ld. DR on the other hand opposed the arguments advanced by the ld. Counsel for the Assessee. He submitted that despite repeated opportunities granted by the CIT(A), the assessee did not appear before him. Therefore the order of the CIT(A) be upheld and the grounds raised

by the assessee should be dismissed.

4. I have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the material available on record and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. It is an admitted fact that due to non- appearance by the assessee before him, the CIT(A) passed an ex parte order confirming the disallowances made by the AO. However, considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, I deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case. The assessee is also hereby directed not to seek adjournment under any pretext and appear before the CIT(A) and make its submissions. The ld. CIT(A) shall decide the issue as per fact and law after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. I hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 3 (Maha Seer Infrastructure P. Ltd.)

6. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. (Order Pronounced in the Court at the time of hearing itself i.e. on 25.09.2017)

MODERN INFO TECHNOLOGY PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments