This article provides an in-depth analysis of the case ITA No. 4796/DEL/2019, where the appellant, Satish Kumar Gautam from Ghaziabad, filed an appeal against the Income Tax Officer (ITO), Ward-2(4), Ghaziabad, for the assessment year 2010-11. The appeal was filed on May 27, 2019, and the final tribunal order was pronounced on February 19, 2020.
Satish Kumar Gautam, represented by Shri Nikhil Gupta, CA, filed his return for the assessment year 2010-11. The case was selected for scrutiny, and the assessment was contested by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) of Ward-2(4), Ghaziabad. The primary issues in the appeal included the delay in filing the appeal, the exparte order passed by the CIT(A), and the addition of cash deposits as unexplained income.
The appellant raised several grounds of appeal, which are summarized as follows:
During the hearing, the appellant’s counsel argued that the CIT(A) passed the exparte impugned order without providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee. The counsel requested that the issues in dispute be set aside and decided afresh by the CIT(A) after giving adequate opportunity to the assessee.
On the other hand, the Senior Departmental Representative (DR), Shri Pradeep Singh Gautam, supported the impugned order and contended that the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal due to the appellant’s non-cooperation.
The tribunal, comprising Judicial Member Shri H.S. Sidhu, acknowledged that the CIT(A) did not provide sufficient opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the tribunal set aside the issues in dispute and directed the CIT(A) to decide the same afresh after giving adequate opportunity to the assessee.
The tribunal also directed the assessee, through his counsel, to appear before the CIT(A) on April 29, 2020, at 10:00 AM for the hearing. The tribunal emphasized that there was no need for the CIT(A) to issue a notice to the assessee, as the order had been pronounced in the open court.
In conclusion, the case ITA No. 4796/DEL/2019 demonstrates the importance of providing adequate opportunity to the assessee to present their case. The tribunal’s decision to set aside the issues and direct a fresh hearing ensures that the principles of natural justice are upheld. This case highlights the necessity for tax authorities to follow due process and provide reasonable opportunities for taxpayers to defend their positions.
This case serves as a precedent for other taxpayers facing similar issues of delayed appeals and exparte orders. It underscores the importance of adequate representation and the need for tax authorities to adhere to the principles of natural justice. Taxpayers can take solace in the fact that the tribunal is willing to intervene and ensure fair treatment in the adjudication of tax disputes.
Satish Kumar Gautam vs. ITO Ward-2(4), Ghaziabad: Delay in Filing Appeal
Manage the increasing number of hearings effortlessly by leveraging the legal AI revolution We are India's Leading revolutionary AI-powered legal platform where you can get enough insights into top cases and judgements.
Research Platform