M/S. PRIME PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 10 (3) (2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3290/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 February 2024AY 2013-14Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Accountant Member), Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale ( (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 noted that the CIT(A) had not adjudicated the grounds of appeal on merit. In the interest of natural justice, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the issues to the CIT(A)'s file for a fresh adjudication after providing an adequate opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) dated 17.7.2023 for AY 2013-14. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte on the grounds of non-response to notices, despite the assessee claiming to have filed submissions.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) without proper adjudication and whether the assessee was denied natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

IT Act

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai “C” Bench, Mumbai.

Before: Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (JM)

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle Hariya &
For Respondent: Shri H.M. Bhatt
Hearing: 03.01.2024Pronounced: 05.02.2024

The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 17.7.2023 passed by the learned CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi and it relates to A.Y. 2013-14. The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of the learned CIT(A) in dismissing the appeal of the assessee without considering the submissions made before him.

2.

We heard the parties and perused the record. We noticed that the learned CIT(A) has passed the order ex-parte on the ground that the assessee did not respond to the notices issued by him. However, it is the submission of the learned AR that the assessee has furnished certain submissions before the learned CIT(A). Be that as it may, we notice that the learned CIT(A) has not adjudicated the grounds of the assessee on merit. Hence, in the interest of natural justice, we are of the view that the assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to present its case properly before the learned CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the learned CIT(A) and restore all the issues to his file for adjudicating them afresh, after affording adequate opportunity of being heard. We also direct the assessee to fully cooperate with the learned CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the appeal.

4.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 05.02.2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →