SARAH INFRAPROJECTS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 8(1)(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1383/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 June 2017AY 2010-112 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) should have decided the appeal on merits and not summarily dismissed it for non-prosecution. The matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were filed against orders of the CIT(A). The assessee contended that the CIT(A) passed the order without providing a proper opportunity to be heard. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without considering the merits of the case and providing a proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)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, MUMBAI BENCHES “SMC”, MUMBAI

Before: Shri Shamim Yahya

Hearing: 22.05.2017Pronounced: 05.06.2017

O R D E R These are appeals filed by the assessee are directed against respective orders of learned CIT(A) for the concerned assessment years.

2.

At the outset, it is noted that in both the appeals, it is the assessee’s plea that learned CIT(A) has passed the order without giving full and proper opportunity to the assessee of being heard.

3.

Though none appeared on behalf of the assessee, we find that learned CIT(A) in this case has passed the order by dismissing the appeal for non- prosecution. The learned CIT(A) has not considered the assessee’s plea submitted in the statement of facts that the Assessing Officer has passed the order without giving opportunity for further hearing to the assessee. I find that it is incumbent upon the learned CIT(A) to pass the order on merits of the (i) CIT v. T.A.Luthara HUF 240 Taxman 133 (Bombay) (ii) CIT v. S.Chenniappa Mudaliar [(1969) 74 ITR 41 (SC)] 4. In view of the aforesaid precedents, in my considered opinion the issue raised in the appeal needs to be remitted to the file of learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A) shall consider the issue afresh and pass a speaking order after giving the assessee an proper opportunity of being heard.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →