NEELKANTH POLYMERS,SONEPAT vs. DCIT, CPC, BENGALURE, ITO WARD-3, SONEPAT, SONEPAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2865/DEL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 April 2024AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD: (Judicial Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee was denied an adequate opportunity of hearing by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals). Consequently, the appeal was restored to the file of the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication on merits, with specific directions to provide the assessee with a proper opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the NFAC's order for AY 2018-19, which confirmed CPC's actions including dismissing the appeal ex parte, invoking Section 154, and making additions under Section 40A(3) and Section 36(1)(va). The assessee contended that the appeal was dismissed without proper opportunity of hearing despite an adjournment request.

What were the issues?

Dismissal of appeal ex parte without adequate opportunity of hearing by CIT(A) and validity of additions made under sections 40A(3) and 36(1)(va) of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 154,Section 40A(3),Section 36(1)(va)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath & Raj Kumar
For Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Hearing: 23.01.2024Pronounced: 22.04.2024

ORDER PER CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD: JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 04.08.2023 for the assessment

2018-19. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

“On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the (NFAC) erred in confirming the following actions of Centralized Processing Centre (CPC), Bangaluru in –

1.

Dismissing appeal against order passed u/s 143(1) of the Act without providing due and adequate opportunity of hearing:

2. Invoking section 154 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 and determining taxable income of Rs.18,07,060/- against originally determined income at Rs.1,92,340/- ;

3. Making following addition to the income as originally assessed –

a. Rs.14,79,462/- under Section 40A(3) of the Act; b. Rs. 1,35,256/- on account of ESI and EPF invoking section 361)(va) of the Act.

The above actions being arbitrary, fallacious, unwarranted and illegal must be quashed with directions for appropriate relief.”

2.

At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee submits that the appeal of the assessee was disposed of ex parte without giving reasonable opportunity of hearing.

3.

Learned counsel for the assessee referring to the screen shot of the portal of the Income Tax Department submits that as a matter of fact that the assessee filed adjournment letter but the learned Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee observing that there was no complaint by the assessee.

4.

Learned counsel for the assessee further submits that the appeal may be restored to the file of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) for de novo adjudication after providing adequate opportunity of hearing.

5.

3. Learned Departmental Representative has no serious objection in restoring the appeal to the file of the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre for deciding the grounds on merits.

6.

Heard rival submissions and perused the orders of the authorities below.

7.

On hearing both the sides and perusing the order of learned Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals), this appeal is restored to the file of the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals) to decide the appeal afresh on merits after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

8.

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

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →