SEEMA SATISH MEHTA,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD-26(3)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 766/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 July 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON'BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, HON'BLE (Judicial Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the dismissal of the appeal by the CIT(A) was in limine without proper service of notice and opportunity of being heard. In the interest of justice, the matter was restored to the file of the CIT(A).

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) without affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Despite mention of multiple hearing dates, the serving of notices was not established. The assessee did not appear before the tribunal, but the D/R was heard.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, HON’BLE

Hearing: 03/07/2024Pronounced: 03/07/2024

PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM: This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order dt. 30/01/2024 by NFAC, Delhi for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee by an ex- parte order without affording reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

3.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee. We have heard the ld. D/R at length and have carefully perused the order of the ld. First Appellate Authority.

4.

On perusal, we find that though there is mention of five (5) dates but how and where these notices were served is not known. Thereafter we find that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in limine. In the Assessment Year: 2017-18 Seema Satish Mehta 2

interest of justice and fair play, we deem it fit to restore the issues to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the appeal afresh after affording reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee by serving notice at proper address.

5.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Court on 3rd July, 2024 at Mumbai. (RAHUL CHAUDHARY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Kolkata, Dated 03/07/2024 *SC SrPs *SC SrPs *SC SrPs *SC SrPs

आदेश की "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ" / The Appellant

1.

""थ" / The Respondent 2. संबंिधत आयकर आयु" / Concerned Pr. CIT 3. आयकर आयु" अपील

4.

( ) / The CIT(A)- िवभागीय "ितिनिध ,आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई /DR,ITAT, Mumbai, 5. गाड" फाई/ Guard file. 6. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →