SHRIKANT ATUR VARADAN,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD11(2), PUNE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The ITAT condoned the delay in filing the appeal. The Tribunal set aside the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) and restored the matter to the CIT(A)'s file for re-adjudication on merits, providing one final opportunity to the assessee.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte due to the assessee's non-attendance. The appeal to the ITAT was filed with a significant delay of 776 days.
What were the issues?
Whether an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) without providing a proper opportunity to be heard is sustainable. Whether a significant delay in filing an appeal can be condoned.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE „B‟ BENCHES :: PUNE
O R D E R
Per PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM:
This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Pune, dated 07.02.2020 for A.Y.2013-14 as per the grounds of appeal on record.
At the outset, it is observed that the present appeal is time barred by 776 days and the assessee had filed condonation petition along with affidavit explaining the reasons for delay. We have perused the contents of the affidavit and the condonation of delay petition and it is seen that the delay caused was due to circumstances beyond the control of the assessee and, such delay was neither deliberate nor intentional on the part of the assessee. The ld.DR also agreed that the delay may be condoned. Considering the facts, the delay of 776 days Sahebrao Damu Shewale in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and the matter is heard on merits.
We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. We find that the ld.CIT (A) has passed ex-parte order. The rights and liabilities of the parties herein have not been substantially adjudicated by the first appellate authority in this matter. The basic foundation of quasi-judicial authority is based on the principles of natural and equitable justice where the taxpayer/assessee needs to be heard and the rights and liabilities to be decided on merits of the case. In this matter, since the assessee did not attend the hearing, it resulted in passing ex-parte order by the ld.CIT(A). In view of the Income-tax Act, being welfare legislation, we are of the considered view, one final opportunity should be provided to the assessee to represent his case before the ld. CIT(A) on merits and in view thereof, we set aside the order of ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to his file for re-adjudication as per law determining the case on merits. Grounds of appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open Court on 20th July, 2023.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Sushama Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Saudamini Samantray vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar IiOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Keshav Rice Mill, Ganjam vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, KatakaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026