RAMA SOCIAL REFORMS EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,MEERUT vs. ITO (EXEMPTION) WARD, GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2359/DEL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 October 2023AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD (Judicial Member)4 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(Appeals) should have provided adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The appeal was restored to the CIT(Appeals) for deciding afresh.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(Appeals) without adequate opportunity for hearing. The assessee sought adjournments due to the death of their authorized representative from COVID-19 and the need to obtain crucial documents from the Assessing Officer.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in dismissing the appeal without granting sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, [ DELHI BENCH “S.M.C.” : DELHI ]

Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD

For Appellant: Shri V. Raja Kumar, Shri Om Parkash
Hearing: 05/10/2023

आदेश / O R D E R PER C. N. PRASAD, J. M. :

1.

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to CIT (Appeals)]/National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC] dated 23.06.2023 for assessment year 2016-17.

2.

The ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submits that the appeal was disposed of by the ld. CIT (Appeals) without providing adequate opportunity of hearing. Ld. Counsel submits that assessee sought adjournment on various occasions for the reason that the Authorized Representative expired due to COVID–19 and the assessee applied for certain certified copies from the Assessing Officer and sought adjournment as the assessee was not in a position to represent its case without the copies of the document. However, the ld. CIT (Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee without giving any opportunity.

3.

The ld. DR has no serious objection in restoring the matter back to the ld. CIT (Appeals).

4.

Heard both the sides and perusing the evidences furnished before me it is observed that the assessee requested the ld. CIT (Appeals) to adjourn the hearing as the authorized representative expired due to COVID–19. As such complete record for preparing and representing the appeal was not available with the assessee, the assessee had applied for copies of the documents from the Assessing Officer. The assessee could collect documents partially and still some of the documents remained to be collected. However, it seems that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the ld. CIT (Appeals) without giving any further time though the assessee sought for adjournment. Taking the totality of facts and circumstances into consideration I am of the view that this appeal 2 should go back to the file of the ld. CIT (Appeals) for deciding afresh after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Thus, the same is restored to the file of the ld. CIT (Appeals) for deciding the appeal afresh.

5.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on : 11/10/2023.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →