Mala Goel, Delhi V. ITO, Ward-30(1), New Delhi

ITA 3045/DEL/2022

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Mala Goel against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which dismissed her appeal for the Assessment Year 2014-15. The primary grievances included the dismissal of her appeal without proper hearing and the violation of the principles of natural justice, particularly concerning an adjournment application that was not considered. The Tribunal found that the NFAC should have addressed the merits of the case rather than dismissing it in limine and thus restored the matter to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 116301 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 31-07-2023
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 28-12-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘E’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.3045/Del/2022 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Mala Goel W-58, Greater Kailash-I, New Delhi-110048 PAN No.AKVPG8596A Vs ITO Ward- 30 (1) New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Deepesh Garg, Advocate Respondent by Ms. Smita Singh, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 01/08/2023 Date of Pronouncement: 01/08/2023 ORDER PER N. K. BILLAIYA, AM: 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 2 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. 3 5. Decision announced in the open court 01.08.2023. Sd/- Sd/- [ASTHA CHANDRA] [N.K. BILLAIYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: .08.2023 *Neha* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CITi 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar ITAT, New Delhi