Sunshine Infraprojects Private Limited, New Delhi V. ITO WARD - 24(3), NEW DELHI

ITA 40/DEL/2020

AI Insights

The case involves Sunshine Infraprojects Private Limited, which appealed against the order of the CIT(A)-8, New Delhi, dated 03.12.2019 for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The primary grievance of the assessee was the dismissal of their appeal by the CIT(A) without a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard. The Tribunal noted the absence of representation for the assessee despite notice and proceeded ex parte. Upon review, the Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) had not adequately addressed the merits of the case and had relied on precedents without proper consideration of the appellant's circumstances.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 121206 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 02-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 01-01-2020
• Other Referred Cases: Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar 223 ITR 480
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.40/Del/2020 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sunshine Infraprojects Private Limited 325, Plot No.7, Sec-3, Vardhman Plaza, Manglam places, New Delhi-110085 PAN No.AANCS6732K Vs ITO Ward- 24 (3) New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by None Respondent by Ms. Maninder Kaur, SR DR Date of hearing: 03/01/2023 Date of Pronouncement: 03/01/2023 ORDER PER N. K. BILLAIYA, AM: This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the CIT(A)-8, New Delhi dated 03.12.2019 pertaining to A.Y.2011- 12. 2. The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee is that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 2 3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee inspite of notice, therefore, we decided to proceed exparte. 4. A perusal of the order of the first appellate authority show that the FAA has proceeded by following the observations made by Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar 223 ITR 480. 5. We are of the considered view that the CIT(A) ought to have decided the appeal on merits of the case after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. Though there is a mention of electronically communicated notice but whether that notice has been actually served upon the assessee is not clear. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play we restore this appeal to the files of the CIT(A). The CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeal afresh after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 7. Decision announced in the open court on 03.01.2023. Sd/- Sd/- [KUL BHARAT] [N.K. BILLAIYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated: .01.2023 *Neha* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CITi 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar ITAT, New Delhi