CEA Consultants Pvt Ltd, New Delhi V. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Noida

ITA 1705/DEL/2022

AI Insights

The case involves two separate appeals by CEA Consultants Pvt. Ltd. against the orders of the CIT(A)-4, Kanpur, dated 18.05.2022 for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16. The appeals were dismissed by the CIT(A) for want of prosecution as no representative of the assessee attended the appellate proceedings. The assessee challenged the dismissal, arguing that the appeals were not adjudicated on their merits, and raised issues regarding the lack of mandatory approval under section 153D and unlawful additions made without proper application of mind or in violation of natural justice. The Tribunal, noting the absence of adjudication on merits, restored the appeals to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 116043 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-05-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 29-05-2023
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 26-07-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1705 & 1706/Del/2022 Assessment Year: 2014-15 & 2015-16 CEA Consultants Pvt. Ltd. C/o Kapil Goel Adv. F- 26/124, Sector-7, Rohini, New Delhi -110085 PAN No.AAACC2342N Vs DCIT Central Circle-2 Noida (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by None Respondent by Ms. Rishpal Bedi, CIT DR Date of hearing: 30/05/2023 Date of Pronouncement: 30/05/2023 ORDER PER N. K. BILLAIYA, AM: ITA No.1705/Del/2022 and 1706/Del/2022 are two separate appeals by the assessee preferred against the two separate orders of the CIT(A)-4, Kanpur dated 18.05.2022 pertaining to A.Y.2014-15 and 2015-16. 2. Since common issues are involved in both the appeals they were heard exparate and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 2 3. None attended on behalf of the assessee inspite of notices to the assessee. We decided to proceed exparate. 4. The common grievance in both the appeals are as under :- 1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT-A vide impugned order dated I8.05.2022 has grossly erred in dismissing assessee’s appeal for want of prosecution without lawfully adjudicating the appeal on its independent merit by deciding the self explanatory appeal grounds raised vide FORM 35 as per provisions of sec. 251(1) of the 1961 Act. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT-A vide impugned, order dated 18.05.2022 has grossly erred in not accepting the legal and jurisdictional plea/ground that there is lack of mandatory VALID approval u/s 153D as per undisputed facts of the case due to which impugned extremely “HIGL1 PITCHED” assessment is void ab initio. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT-A vide impugned order dated 18.05.2022 has grossly erred in not deleting the unlawful and arbitrary additions/disallowances made in impugned extremely “high pitched” assessment order which were patently made without any “application of mind” and in total/complete violation of principles of natural justice that is without valid/requisite mandatory SCN/ “SHOW CAUSE NOTICE” as per CBDT instruction no. 20/2015 dated 29.12.2015 (which is firmly Established when main addition u/s 68 of Rs 90,31,50,000 is rested on elementary terra-firma of sec. 68). 3 4. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT-A vide impugned order dated 18.05.2022 has grossly erred in not accepting the appellant case that all the additions/ disallowances made in impugned HIGH PITCHED asst. order defies all sense of rationality and are made in most arbitrary and capricious manner. 5. As can be seen from the grounds of appeal and also from the perusal of the order of the CIT(A) the appeals have been dismissed for want of prosecution as none attended the appellate proceedings. 6. In our considered view the first appellate authority ought to have dismissed / decided the appeals on merits of the case. 7. In the interest of justice we restore both the appeals to the files of the CIT(A). The CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeal afresh after affording a reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 8. In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purpose. 4 9. Decision announced in the open court on 30.05.2023. Sd/- Sd/- [ANUBHAV SHARMA] [N.K. BILLAIYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: .05.2023 *Neha* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CITi 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar ITAT, New Delhi