SHRI APOORVA JOSHI,NOIDA vs. ITO, NOIDA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3499/DEL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 October 2016AY 2009-103 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the ex parte order passed by the CIT(A) without granting an adjournment was not in the interest of justice. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer imposed a penalty of Rs. 3,41,947/-. The assessee's request for adjournment before the CIT(A) was rejected, leading to an ex parte order confirming the penalty.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in passing an ex parte order by rejecting the assessee's adjournment request. Whether the penalty order should be decided afresh after providing an opportunity of being heard.

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 T.R. Talwar, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri N.K. Bawal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 17.10.2016Pronounced: 17.10.2016

ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A) on 29.2.2016 in relation to the assessment year 2009-10.

2.

The first ground of the assessee’s appeal is against the passing of ex parte order by the ld. CIT(A), after rejecting the request for adjournment.

3.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that a penalty of Rs.3,41,947/- was imposed by the AO. The assessee filed adjournment application

1.

before the ld.CIT(A) which was turned down and, eventually, the penalty order was confirmed ex parte.

4.

I have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. In view of the fact that the ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the penalty by means of an ex parte order rejecting the assessee’s first application for adjournment, I am of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would meet adequately if the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of ld. CIT(A). I order accordingly and direct him to decide the appeal afresh as per law, after allowing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

5.

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

The order pronounced in the open court on 17.10.2016.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →