AKHIL RIBBONS PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 2(1), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6054/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 January 2021AY 2016-174 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred by dismissing the appeal solely on the grounds of non-appearance without deciding the merits. The case was restored to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits after providing one last opportunity to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee company challenged an ex parte order by the CIT(A) which confirmed an addition of Rs. 29,73,600/- made by the AO. The addition was for an unexplained advance payment of 40,000 Euro due to non-submission of details.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal can be dismissed solely on non-appearance without deciding the merits, and the proper procedure for disposing of an appeal by the CIT(A).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69C,Section 143(3),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, DELHI BENCH “SMC-2”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R.K. PANDA

For Respondent: Ms. Shivani Bansal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 04/01/2021

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the ex parte order dated 17th May 2019 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-1 , New Delhi relating to assessment year 2016-17.

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite service of notice. Therefore, this appeal is being decided on the basis of material available on record and after hearing Ld. Sr. DR.

3.

The assessee in the grounds of appeal has challenged the ex parte order of the Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs. 29,73,600/- made by the AO u/s 69C of the I.T. Act 1961.

4.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a company and filed its return of income on 17th October, 2016 declaring total loss of Rs. 5,35,026/-. The case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny through CASS. The AO in the order passed u/s 143(3) made addition of Rs. 29,73,600/- on the ground that the advance payment of 40000 Euro made by the assessee remained unexplained on account of non submission of any details.

4.1 In appeal the Ld. CIT(A) in the ex parte order passed by him sustained the addition made by the AO.

4.2 Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

5.

I have heard the Ld. Sr. DR and perused the record. A perusal of the order of the CIT(A) shows that he has dismissed the appeal on account of non appearance of the assessee by following the decision of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT 223 ITR 480. He, however, has not decided the appeal on merit. As per the provisions of section 250 (6) the order of the CIT(A) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision. However, in the instant case the Ld. CIT(A) has not given any reason for his decision on merits but has simply dismissed the appeal on account of non appearance which is not as per the statute. I, therefore, deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the appeal on merit by passing a speaking order after giving one last opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case. The assessee is also hereby directed to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) and substantiate its case failing which the Ld. CIT(A) is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. I hold and direct accordingly.

6.

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

Order pronounced in the open court at time of hearing itself i.e. on 04th January, 2021.

More judgments on Section 69C

All 8,217 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →