NARAYAN DATTARAO GIRAM,PARBHANI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(5), AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It held that since both the assessment and first appellate orders were passed ex parte, it would be just and fair to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the Assessing Officer.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was filed late by 45 days. Both the assessment order and the first appellate order were passed ex parte, meaning in the absence of the assessee. The assessee claimed this was due to a change in Chartered Accountant and issues with email notifications.
What were the issues?
Whether the ex parte assessment and appellate orders should be set aside due to the assessee's inability to represent their case. Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.
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
आदेश / ORDER
PER R.S. SYAL, VP:
This appeal by the assessee arises out of the ex parte order dated 31-05-2023 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 2011-12.
This appeal is time barred by about 45 days. The assessee has filed an affidavit stating the reasons which led to the late filing. I am satisfied with the reasons so stated. Therefore, the delay is condoned and the instant appeal is admitted for disposal on merits.
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.13,28,000/-. The ld. CIT(A) also passed ex parte order in the absence of the assessee. The ld. AR submitted that the assessee had changed the Chartered Accountant and the case was not represented before the authorities because of registration of the e-mail id of the previous Chartered Accountant. As such, he could not receive the notices sent by the authorities. 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.
In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 03rd 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. Saraswati Enterprises vs. State Of RajasthanRajasthan · 28 Oct 2026
- Akshaya Consortium vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Dipanshu Aggarwal vs. Director General Of GST IntelligenceDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Dezinetree Projects PVT. LTD. vs. Spokes Digital Inc And AnrDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Jaydeep Jayantilal Hudaka vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 28 Oct 2026