SHRI PRABHAKAR KACHARU NIRBHAWANE,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), PUNE, PUNE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the ex parte order and remitted the matter back to the CIT(A). The CIT(A) was directed to decide the appeal afresh after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex parte by the CIT(A) for non-prosecution. The assessee claimed they were unaware of the notices due to an incorrect email ID registration.
What were the issues?
Whether the ex parte dismissal of an appeal for non-prosecution is justified when the assessee claims lack of awareness of notices due to technical reasons.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC BENCH, PUNE
Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL
This appeal by the assessee arises out of the ex parte order dated 11-08-2023 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 2012-13.
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.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Act determining total income at Rs.21,09,720/-. The ld. CIT(A) noted vide para No.5.5 of the impugned order that: “ Based on the above it appears that the assessee is not keen on pursuing the appeal. Accordingly given that this office has not received any information or document so as to make a judgment based on merits, this office is left with no option but to dismiss this appeal. Accordingly the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed”. He, thus dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non- prosecution. The ld. AR submitted that the assessee’s case was not represented before the ld. first appellate authority because of registration of the e-mail id of the son of the assessee, which remained unnoticed. As such, the assessee was not aware of the notices. He thus prayed for granting another opportunity. In view of the facts obtaining in the instant case, 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 ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the appeal 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 proceedings .
In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 09th October, 2023.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Ramshrayashil Constructions PVT.LTD vs. Union Of INDIA Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Finance, Government Of INDIAJharkhand · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S. Kiea Corporate Business Solutions vs. The Deputy State Tax OfficerTelangana · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S. Vrajman Enterprises vs. The Deputy State Tax OfficerTelangana · 2 Nov 2026
- Nimmakayala Padmavathi vs. The Union Of INDIAAndhra Pradesh · 2 Nov 2026
- Som Nath Nagar Mal Th Partner Sanjay Mahajan vs. Union Of INDIA Th Department Of Financial Services, Ministry Of Finance And OthersJammu and Kashmir and Ladakh · 2 Nov 2026