BHARAT HIRACHAND JAIN,THANE vs. ITO WARD 1(1), THANE
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that even if the assessee did not appear, the appellate authority should have decided the appeal on its merits. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the appeals are restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee preferred several appeals against orders of the NFAC, Delhi, pertaining to assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11, and 2011-12. The NFAC dismissed these appeals in limine for non-appearance of the assessee.
What were the issues?
Whether the NFAC was justified in dismissing the appeals for non-appearance without deciding on merits.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, HON’BLE
Heard together (6 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
and 3872/Mum/2024 are three separate appeals by the assessee preferred against three separate orders of NFAC, Delhi relating to levy of penalty in respect of the quantum addition pertaining to Assessment Years 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12.
The captioned appeals were heard together and are disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity.
The underline facts in the issues are identical where all the appeals were dismissed by the NFAC in limine without going into the merits of the case for non-appearance.
We have carefully perused the impugned orders of NFAC. We are of the considered view that even if the assessee chose not to appear and Others Bharat Hirachand Jain 3 before the appellate authority, the appellate authority ought to have decided the appeal on merits of the case.
In the interest of justice and fair play we deem it fit to restore the captioned appeals to the files of the CIT(A) with a direction to decide the appeal afresh after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and the assessee is directed to attend the appellate proceedings and present his case.
Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Court on 11th September, 2024 at Mumbai.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Mahaveer Ispat Traders vs. Principal Commissioner Dgst Delhi Department Of Trade And Taxes Gnctd & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
