GURDYAL SINGH,RUDRAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, RUDRAPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 74/DDN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun12 February 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (Judicial Member), SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) has no power to dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution and must decide appeals on merits as per Sections 250 and 251. The case was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) ex-parte without providing a reasonable opportunity for submissions. The assessee claimed that notices were not received on the email address provided in Form No. 35.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution without affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard and whether proper notice was served on the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 251

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “DB”, DELHI

Hearing: 12/02/2025

(A.Y.2017-18) Gurdyal Singh, Jayanagar No. 5, Chattarpur, Rudrapur, Uttarakhand 263153 ...... अपीलाथ�/Appellant PAN: DJMPS-8978-B बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Mandi Samiti Parisar, Kichha Road, ..... �ितवादी/Respondent Rudrapur, Uttarakhand 263153 अपीलाथ� �ारा/ Appellant by : Shri Akshay Aggarwal, Chartered Accountant �ितवादी�ारा/Respondent by : Shri Amar Pal Singh, CIT- DR (Through VC) सुनवाई क� ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 12/02/2025 घोषणा क� ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : : 12/02/2025 आदेश/ORDER

PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:

1.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(A)') dated 31.08.2023, for assessment year 2017-18.

2.

Shri Akshay Aggarwal, appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that the CIT(A) in an ex-parte proceedings has dismissed appeal of the assessee without affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions. The CIT(A) failed to (A.Y.2017-18) serve the notice of hearing of appeal on e-mail address mentioned in Form No.

35.

Hence, there was no representation from the assessee during First Appellate Proceedings.

3.

Per contra, Shri Amar Pal Singh representing the department vehemently defended impugned order and submitted that the notices were sent to the assessee on four occasions, the assessee failed to respond to any of the notices.

4.

Both sides heard. A perusal of impugned order reveals that the CIT(A) had sent notice of hearing to the assessee on 07.03.2020, 24.12.2020, 28.07.2022 and 05.03.2023. However, the mode of service and address on which notice was issued by the CIT(A) is not emanating from the records. The contention of assessee is that the notices sent by the CIT(A) were never received by the assessee on the email id mentioned in Form no. 35 for the purpose of communication of the notices. We further find that the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal for non prosecution. It is a trait law that the CIT(A) has no power to dismiss appeal for non prosecution. The provisions of section 250 r.w.s 251 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) mandates the CIT(A) to decide appeal on merits. Considering entire facts of the case, we deem it appropriate to restore appeal back to the CIT(A) for denovo adjudication, after affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law.

5.

The CIT(A) shall serve the notice to the assessee on the email address provided by the assessee in Form No. 35.

More judgments on Section 251

All 1,124 judgments and leading authorities on Section 251 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →