MALA GOEL,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-30(1), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3045/DEL/2022Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 August 2023AY 2014-153 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 NFAC ought to have decided the appeal on merits and restored the issue back to the CIT(A). The CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeal afresh after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the NFAC was dismissed for want of persuasion without adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee had also filed an adjournment application which was not considered before the impugned order was passed.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for want of persuasion and without adhering to the principles of natural justice, and whether the adjournment application was wrongly rejected.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI

Before: SH. N. K. BILLAIYA & MS. ASTHA CHANDRA

For Respondent: Ms. Smita Singh, Sr. DR
Hearing: 01/08/2023Pronounced: 01/08/2023

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order dated 22.11.2022 by NFAC, Delhi pertaining to A.Y. 2014-15. 2. The grievance of the assessee read as under :- 1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal of assessee for want of persuasion and that too without any basis and without providing adequate opportunity of being heard and without observing the principles of natural justice.

2.

That in any case and in any view of the matter, Ld. CIT(A) ought to have admitted/appreciated the adjournment application filed by the assessee on 07- 11-2022 wherein adjournment was sought up to 24-11-2022 and the impugned order was passed on 22-11-2022 and thus the impugned order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice.

3.

That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not deciding the appeal on merit.

4. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing and all the above grounds are without prejudice to each other.

3. A perusal of the order of NFAC show that the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed in limine. We are of the considered view that NFAC ought to have decided the appeal of the assessee considering the merits of the case. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play we restore the issues back to the files of the CIT(A). The CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeal afresh on merits of the case after affording a reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard.

4.

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

5.

Decision announced in the open court 01.08.2023.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →