SHRI SUBHASH TUKARAM BHADKE,NASHIK vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), NASHIK
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the NFAC erred by dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without adjudicating the issues on merits. The matter was remanded back to the NFAC for a decision on merits.
What were the facts?
The assessee, engaged in commission agency and vegetable trading, did not file a return of income. Upon receiving information about cash deposits, a notice under section 148 was issued, but no return was filed. The assessment was completed ex-parte.
What were the issues?
Whether the NFAC was justified in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without deciding the case on merits. The primary issue is the procedural correctness of the appellate authority's decision.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI
ORDER PER BENCH : These are the appeals filed by the assessee directed against the separate orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘NFAC’] dated 17.08.2023 for the assessment years 2013-14 to 2015-16 respectively. 2. Since the identical facts and common issues are involved in all the above captioned three appeals of the assessee, we proceed to dispose of the same by this common order.
2 to 1069/PUN/2023 3. For the sake of convenience and clarity, the facts relevant to the appeal in ITA No.1067/PUN/2023 for the assessment year 2013-14 are stated herein. ITA No.1067/PUN/2023, A.Y. 2013-14 : 4. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual engaged in commission agency business and trading in vegetables. No regular return of income under the provisions of section 139 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) was filed by the assessee. However, on receipt of the information that the appellant had made cash deposits of Rs.79,49,674/- with M/s. Shri Renuka Mata Multi State Credit Society Ltd. during the year under consideration, a notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 31.03.2021. In response to notice u/s 148, no return of income was filed by the appellant. Based on this information, the assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer vide order dated 30.03.2022 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act at a total income of Rs.81,47,044/-.
Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, an appeal was before the NFAC, who vide impugned order dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution.
Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal.
More judgments on Section 139
- Shree Bandharda Seva Sahkari Mandli Ltd… vs Income Tax Officer Ward -4, JunagadhITA 881/RJT/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Shamsunder Pritesh Malode, Hyderabad vs ACIT, Circle-12(1), HyderabadITA 399/HYD/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Parthasaradhi Mutually Aided Co-Operative… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-17(1), HyderabadITA 2322/HYD/2026[AY 2016-17]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026
- Radhakishan Potharajula, Karim Nagar vs ITO (Int Taxn)-2, HyderabadITA 2340/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Shiva Shiksha Samiti, Deendayal Puram, Up… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-Exemption, Agra…ITA 415/AGR/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sutlej Textiles And Industries Limited vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026