VIVA SWARAJ,PUNE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1079/PUN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 December 2023AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) failed to frame points of determination and provide a detailed discussion as required by law. Consequently, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2013-2014 was decided ex-parte by the CIT(A) without addressing the substantive grounds on merits. The CIT(A) noted the assessee's non-appearance despite receiving hearing notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated the appeal on merits when it was passed ex-parte without addressing the grounds. Whether the CIT(A) followed the procedural requirements of framing points of determination and discussing them.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “B” : PUNE

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

Hearing: 14.12.2023Pronounced: 14.12.2023

ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. :

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2013- 2014, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short [the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1055109411(1), dated 14.08.2023, involving proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

We note at the outset from a perusal of the instant case file that the CIT(A)'s impugned lower appellate order, passed ex-parte; has not dealt with the relevant issue(s) on 2 ITA.No.1079/PUN./2023 merits in light of sec.250(6) of the Act requiring him to frame points of determination followed by a detailed discussion.

3.

Learned DR invited our attention to the CIT(A)'s tabulation in para-4 of his impugned lower appellate order that the assessee had not put in appearance despite having received various hearing notice(s). We find no merit in the Revenue’s instant technical objections once the CIT(A) has not dealt with the assessee’s various substantive grounds on merits in foregoing terms. Faced with the situation, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A) for his afresh adjudication preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing. Ordered accordingly.

4.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 14.12.2023.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →