CULTURE COMPANY INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 11(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4543/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 October 2017AY 2012-132 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred by dismissing the appeal ex-parte without considering the merits of the case. The CIT(A)'s order did not comply with the requirement to state points for determination, decision, and reasons.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) after only one opportunity for hearing. The assessee argued that the CIT(A) did not have the power to dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution and failed to decide on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution without deciding on merits, and whether the CIT(A)'s order met the statutory requirements.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC Bench, Mumbai

Before: Shri R.C. Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Wagaly
For Respondent: Smt. Hemalatha
Hearing: 24.10.2017Pronounced: 26.10.2017

O R D E R Per R.C. Sharma, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) for A.Y. 2012-13.

2.

It has been argued by the learned A.R. that the CIT(A) has given only one opportunity and thereafter dismissed the appeal without going into the merits of the case. He placed on record the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Premkumar Arjundas Luthra dated 25th April, 2016 (297 ITR 614) in support of the proposition that law does not empower the CIT(A) to dismiss an appeal for non prosecution.

3.

I have considered the rival submissions and found that after giving only one opportunity the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal. He has also not discussed the issue on merits whereas, as per provisions of sub-section (6) of Section 250 the order of the CIT(A) should be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reasons for the decision.

1.

2 ITA 4543/Mum/2017 M/s. Culture Company India Pvt. Ltd. 4. In view of the above discussion I set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore the matter back to file of the CIT(A) for deciding afresh on merits after giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes Order pronounced in the open court on 26th October, 2017.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →