SH. NAUSHAD ADMED,SAHARANPUR vs. ITO, SAHARANPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1480/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 July 2016AY 2012-133 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee had improper representation before the lower authorities and was unrepresented before the CIT(A). The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the matter to the AO for fresh assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee's declared revised income was Rs. 4,74,830, but the AO finalized the assessment at Rs. 11,41,530. The assessee was unrepresented before the CIT(A), leading to the AO's order being upheld.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was adequately represented before the lower authorities and if the matter should be restored for fresh assessment due to lack of proper opportunity.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES : SMC-I: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Advocate &, Shri Pankaj Rohra, CA
Hearing: 07.06.2016Pronounced: 07.06.2016

ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A) on 29.1.2016 in relation to the assessment year 2012-13.

2.

Shorn of unnecessary details, it is observed that as against the declared revised income of Rs.4,74,830/-, the AO finalized assessment at Rs.11,41,530/-. Since there was no appearance before the ld. CIT(A), the order passed by the AO was upheld in a summary manner. The assessee is aggrieved against the additions sustained in the first appeal.

3.

After considering the rival submissions and perusing the relevant material on record, it is observed that not only there was improper representation before the AO, but, the assessee remained fully unrepresented before the ld. CIT(A) as well. The ld. AR has advanced reasons for the improper or no representation before the authorities below, with which I am convinced. In my considered opinion, the ends of justice would meet adequately if the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the AO. I order accordingly and direct the AO to finalize the assessment de novo after allowing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The ld. AR has undertaken to extend full cooperation to the AO in such fresh proceedings.

4.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →