| |
| The Tax Publishers2021 TaxPub(DT) 1363 (Del-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 250(6)
Where CIT(A) had not given any reason for his decision on merits but has simply dismissed the appeal on account of non appearance which was not as per the statute, therefore, it was deemed fit to restore the issue back to CIT(A) with a direction to decide the appeal on merits by passing a speaking order after giving one last opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case.
|
Appeal [CIT(A)] - Ex-parte order - Dismissal of appeal preferred by assessee due to non prosecution -
Assessee was engaged in the wholesale business of tea, chemical, etc. AO completed the assessment under section 143(3) wherein he made addition under section 41(1) and thereby raised a tax demand. In appeal due to non-appearance by the assessee CIT(A) passed the ex parte order upholding the addition made by AO. Held: Order of CIT(A) showed that he had dismissed the appeal preferred by the assessee due to non-prosecution. He had not decided the appeal on merit and the so-called decision on merit also was very cryptic in two/three lines. CIT(A) had not given any reason for his decision on merits but has simply dismissed the appeal on account of non-appearance which was not as per the statute. Therefore, it was deemed fit to restore the issue back to CIT(A) with a direction to decide the appeal on merits by passing a speaking order after giving one last opportunity to assessee to substantiate its case.
Relied:CIT v. B.N. Bhattachargee & Anr. (1979) 118 ITR 461 (SC) : 1979 TaxPub(DT) 1026 (SC) CIT v. Multiplan India (Private) Ltd. (1991) 38 ITD 320 (Delhi) : 1991 TaxPub(DT) 1420 (Del-Trib) .
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : Matter remanded
A.Y. : 2015-16
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|