What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee was not given adequate opportunities to present their case before the CIT(A). Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision after affording sufficient opportunities.

The assessee's appeal arose from an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A). The assessee contended that they were not provided sufficient opportunities to be heard before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Varun Media Pvt. Ltd., Noida vs ACIT | ITAT Delhi 2017

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI B.P. JAIN

For Appellant: CA Sh. Satyajeet Goel, CA

For Respondent: Ms. Bedobina Chaudhari, Sr. DR

Hearing: 09/03/2017Pronounced: 10/03/2017

PER B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal of the assessee arises from the order of ld. CIT(A)-1 Noida vide order dated 24.6.2016 for the A.Y. 2012-13. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-

1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the order of Assessing Officer under section 143(3) of Income Tax Act 1961 whereby he has made a addition of total income of Rs. 32,42,050/- against a returned loss of Rs.28,57,729/-. 2. Your Petitioner pray that he may be allowed to urge any additional ground or modify any existing ground at a later stage. 3. That the orders of the lower authorities are not justified on facts and same are bad in law.”

The ld. counsel for the assessee Mr. R.S. Singhvi, Advocate argued at the outset that the ld. CIT(A) passed ex-parte order and he pointed out that “The disposal of appeals are governed by the statutory instructions of the CBDT and it is the consistent endeavor of the CBDT to get the pending appeals disposed as fast as possible and the individual CsIT (Appeals) are assigned specific targets for disposal of pending appeals. In view of these controlling facts and circumstances I am not inclined to accept the request for adjournment on the ground of pre- occupation of counsel, As sufficient opportunity has already been allowed to the appellant and appellant not considered it necessary to enter appearance and defend the case the pending appeal is decided on the basis of material available on record and the impugned order of assessment passed by the Id. Assessing Officer.”

The Learned counsel for the counsel for the assessee prayed the matter may be sent back to the ld. CIT (A) who shall provide sufficient opportunities of being heard to the assessee to present his case.

The ld. DR on the other hand argued that sufficient opportunities were given but the assessee did not file the same. 5. I have heard the rival contentions and perused the facts of the case. It is on record that the assessee has not been provided sufficient opportunities of being heard and therefore it will be in the interest of justice that matter be sent back to the file of the ld. CIT IA) who will decide the appeal de novo but after affording adequate opportunities of being heard to the assessee. Thus all grounds of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in is allowed for statistical purposes.

Pronounced in the open court on 10.03.2017.

VARUN MEDIA PVT. LTD.,NOIDA vs. ACIT, NOIDA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments