SN COMMODITES,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 4(1), INDORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 455/IND/2023Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 May 2024AY 2011-12Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO (Judicial Member), SHRI B.M. BIYANI (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT observed that the CIT(A) failed to comply with the mandate of Section 250(6) by not providing proper reasons for the decision, even though the appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) against an assessment order. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to non-prosecution by the assessee. The assessee then appealed to the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order complied with Section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act when dismissing an appeal for non-prosecution. Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity for proper adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6),Section 147,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI B.M. BIYANI

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Goyal, AR
For Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 20.05.2024Pronounced: 28.05.2024

आदेश / O R D E R

Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:

1.

Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 23.10.2023 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 27.12.2018 passed by learned ITO- 4(1), Indore [“AO”] u/s 147 r.s.w 143(3) of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2011-12, the assessee has filed this appeal.

2.

Section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 provides “The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall

S.N.Commodities, Indore. state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision.”. We observe that in the present case, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal, although due to non-prosecution by assessee on the dates of hearing, but still without complying with the mandate of section 250(6). Therefore, the impugned first appeal-order passed by Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be set aside and the matter is fit for remand to him for a proper adjudication. Ld. AR for assessee prays to remand this matter to CIT(A) for an apt adjudication in terms of section 250(6). Ld. DR would not have any objection to the prayer of Ld. AR but makes a request to direct the assessee to represent his case before CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments. In view of this and also having regard to the principle of natural justice and fair play, we deem it fit to give one more opportunity to assessee so that the assessee can represent his case before CIT(A) for a proper adjudication. Accordingly, we remand this matter back to the file of CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication in terms of section 250(6) after giving opportunity of hearing to assessee. The assessee is also directed to ensure participation in the hearings fixed by Ld. CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments.

S.N.Commodities, Indore.

3.

Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in open court on 28.05.2024.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →