SAVITRI BANSAL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD- 34(4), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 892/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 September 2018AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had indeed passed an ex-parte order without giving the assessee a hearing. Therefore, to ensure justice, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision after providing an opportunity for a hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2014-15 was heard. The assessee's representative argued that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without providing a proper hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without affording a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee, thereby violating principles of natural justice.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘D+SMC’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI N. K. SAINI & MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE

Hearing: 18.09.2018Pronounced: 18.09.2018

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 30/10/2017 passed by CIT (A)-12, New Delhi for Assessment Year 2014-15.

2.

At the time of hearing the Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) passed the ex-parte order without giving proper hearing to the assessee. From the perusal of the order of the CIT(A), it is found that the order of the CIT(A) is ex-parte. The assessee was not given hearing before the CIT(A). Therefore, in the interest of justice, we are inclined to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to remain present before the CIT(A) and properly plead the case before the CIT(A). If the assessee fails to appear before the CIT(A), then the CIT(A) should proceed with the documents filed by the assessee and decide the issue on merit after thoroughly verifying the documents. Thus, we are remanding back this matter before the CIT(A) to decide the issue after giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee by following principles of natural justice.

3.

In result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →