UTKARASH BALASAHEB PATIL,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2780/PUN/2017Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 February 2021AY 2012-133 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) decided the issues ex-parte without the assessee's assistance and without sufficient material. Therefore, the matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a civil contractor, filed a return of income which was assessed at a higher amount by the Assessing Officer. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A), but did not appear for the hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in confirming the Assessing Officer's order ex-parte without proper assistance from the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED, AM & SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM

Hearing: 17.02.2021Pronounced: 19.02.2021

ORDER

PER S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM:

1.

This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 03.08.2017 passed by the CIT(A)-2, Pune [‘CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2012-13.

2.

We find no representation on behalf of the assessee nor any application filed seeking adjournment. The assessee called absent and said ex-parte. Therefore, we proceed to hear the ld. DR and pass order basing on the material evidence available on record. 3. The assessee raised ground nos.1 to 5 amongst which the only issue emanates for our consideration is as to whether the CIT(A) is justified in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer ex-parte of assessee in the facts and circumstances of the case.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →