Vineet Sharma v. ITO, Ward-20(1), New Delhi
[Citation -2016-LL-0926-14]

Citation 2016-LL-0926-14
Appellant Name Vineet Sharma
Respondent Name ITO, Ward-20(1), New Delhi
Court ITAT-Delhi
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 26/09/2016
Assessment Year 2007-08
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags opportunity of being heard • reasonable opportunity • speaking order
Bot Summary: Revenue by Ms. Anima Barnwal, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 21.07.2016 Date of Pronouncement 26.09.2016 ORDER The present appeal has been filed by the assessee assailing the correctness of the order dated 07.10.2010 of CIT(A)-XXII, New Delhi pertaining to 2007-08 assessment year on various grounds wherein Ground No. 1 reads as under:- 1. A perusal of the record shows that the CIT(A) in the course of the hearing of the appeal gave three opportunities to the assessee and thereafter proceeded to dismiss the appeal of the assessee. The order of the Commissioner disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision. The said exercise is found to be missing in the facts of the present case as dismissal is on the grounds that since the assessee has remained unrepresented despite notice the conclusion is drawn that the assessee is not keen to press for the grounds ... Accordingly to make up this statutory deficit available on record the impugned order is set aside and the issues are sent back to the CIT(A) with a direction to pass a speaking order in accordance with law in terms of the statutory mandate. Needless to say that a reasonable opportunity of being heard shall be provided to the assessee by the CIT(A) before passing of the order. 2743/Del/2015 proceedings as failing which the Ld.CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass a speaking order in accordance with law on the basis of the material available on record. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.


IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: SMC-3 NEW DELHI BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A .No.-2743/Del/2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2007-08) Vineet Sharma, Vs ITO, C/o-M/s. RRA TAXINDIA, Ward-20(1), D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi New Delhi-110049. PAN-AKYPS5270Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by Sh. Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue by Ms. Anima Barnwal, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 21.07.2016 Date of Pronouncement 26.09.2016 ORDER present appeal has been filed by assessee assailing correctness of order dated 07.10.2010 of CIT(A)-XXII, New Delhi pertaining to 2007-08 assessment year on various grounds wherein Ground No. 1 reads as under:- 1. That having regard to facts and circumstances of case, Ld.CIT(A has erred in law and on facts in passing impugned order that too without giving adequate opportunity of hearing and without serving notice of hearing to assessee and has further erred in not deciding appeal on merits. 2. perusal of record shows that CIT(A) in course of hearing of appeal gave three opportunities to assessee and thereafter proceeded to dismiss appeal of assessee. Both parties were heard. Ld.AR makes prayer that for reasons beyond control of assessee, he remained unrepresented. It was submitted that notice for specific dates of hearing had not been received by assessee. It was also submitted that in eventuality I.T.A .No.-2743/Del/2015 opportunity of being heard is allowed, he shall participate in proceedings. said prayer was not objected to by Ld.Sr.DR. 3. Having heard rival submissions and perused material available on record, I find that impugned order is unsustainable in law as same is in violation of Statutory requirements as set out in sub-section 6 of section 250 of Income Tax Act, 1961. same is reproduced hereunder for ready-reference:- PROCEDURE IN APPEAL 250. (1) . (2) (3) (4) . (5) . (6) order of Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of appeal shall be in writing and shall state points for determination, decision thereon and reason for decision. (6A)................................................................... 4. perusal of above provision shows that CIT(A) while deciding appeal is statutorily required to set out in writing points for determination and decision thereon supported by reasons for conclusion. said exercise is found to be missing in facts of present case as dismissal is on grounds that since assessee has remained unrepresented despite notice conclusion is drawn that assessee is not keen to press for grounds .. . Accordingly to make up this statutory deficit available on record impugned order is set aside and issues are sent back to CIT(A) with direction to pass speaking order in accordance with law in terms of statutory mandate. Needless to say that reasonable opportunity of being heard shall be provided to assessee by CIT(A) before passing of order. It is hoped that opportunity so made available is utilized in good faith by fully participating in Page 2 of 3 I.T.A .No.-2743/Del/2015 proceedings as failing which Ld.CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass speaking order in accordance with law on basis of material available on record. 5. In result, appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. order is pronounced in open court on 26th September 2016. Sd/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER Amit Kumar Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI Page 3 of 3 Vineet Sharma v. ITO, Ward-20(1), New Delhi
Report Error