PANCH KRUSHNA DAIRY,AHMEDNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, AHMEDNAGAR, AHMEDNAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 655/PUN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 July 2023AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since both the assessment and the first appellate orders were passed ex parte, it would be just and fair to set aside the impugned order. The matter was remitted to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment after providing the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee's case was initially assessed under section 143(3) and later reopened under section 148. Both the assessment order and the first appellate order were passed ex parte due to miscommunication between the assessee and their tax consultant.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex parte assessment and appellate orders, passed without providing the assessee with an adequate opportunity of being heard, are valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 144B,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 Prasad S. Bhandari
For Respondent: Shri Ajay D. Kulkarni

आदेश / ORDER

PER R.S. SYAL, VP:

1.

This appeal by the assessee arises out of the ex parte order dated 27-03-2023 passed by the CIT(A) in National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) in relation to the assessment year 2015-16.

2.

I have heard both the sides and gone through the relevant material on record. It is seen that initially the assessment order in this case was passed u/s.143(3) of the Act assessing total income at Rs.8,90,120/-. The case was reopened by way of notice u/s.148.

Eventually, the assessment was concluded ex parte u/s.147 r.w.s.144B of the Act determining total income at Rs.12,89,931/-.

The ld. CIT(A) also passed ex parte order in the absence of the assessee. The ld. AR submitted that the assessee’s case was not represented before the authorities because of mis-communication between the assessee and the Tax consultant. 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.

3.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 26th July, 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 →