SHRIKANT VINAYAKRAO TAYDE,DHULE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, DHULE, DHULE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1026/PUN/2023Status: HeardITAT Pune11 October 2023AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the ex parte order and remitted the matter to the AO. The assessee was granted a reasonable opportunity of hearing and liberty to lead fresh evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex parte by the CIT(A) for failure to produce evidence. The assessee claimed non-observance of emails and sought to present additional evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex parte orders passed by the lower authorities were justified and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present his case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL

For Appellant: Shri Vinay V. Kawdia
For Respondent: Smt. Neha Deshpande

आदेश / ORDER

PER R.S. SYAL, VP:

1.

This appeal by the assessee arises out of the ex parte order dated 28-07-2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) in relation to the assessment year 2013-14.

2.

Heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. It is seen that the assessment order in this case was passed u/s.144 r.w.s.147 of the Act determining total income at Rs.22,98,447/-. The ld. CIT(A) also passed ex parte order qua the assessee, dismissing the appeal by observing as under :

“7.7 During the course of appellate proceedings, with regard to the above additions, the appellant failed to produce written submissions or documentary evidences in support of his claims even though multiple opportunities were given. Hence, in the absence of any evidences, I do not have any other alternative but to confirm the addition of Rs.22,98,447/- made by the Assessing Officer and upheld the assessment order. Therefore, the grounds of appeal raised by the appellant are dismissed”.

3.

The ld. AR submitted that the assessee’s case was not effectively represented before the authorities because of the non-observance of e-mail by the assessee. Further, the assessee would like to place certain additional evidence to substantiate his case. He thus prayed for granting another opportunity. In view of the facts obtaining in the instant case, where both the assessment as well as the first appellate orders have been passed in the absence of the assessee, I am of the opinion that it would be just and fair if the impugned order is set-aside and the matter is remitted to the file of the AO with a direction to pass the assessment order afresh as per law after allowing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. I order accordingly. Needless to say, the assessee will be at liberty to lead any fresh evidence in support of his case in the fresh assessment.

4.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 11th October, 2023.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →