AVIRAJ KRISHNARAO TAYADE,NASHIK vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, MALEGAON
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that it would be just and fair to set aside the impugned ex parte order. The matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer to pass a fresh assessment order after providing the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal arose from an ex parte order passed by the CIT(A). Both the original assessment order and the appellate order were passed ex parte, meaning the assessee was not given an opportunity to be heard.
What were the issues?
Whether ex parte assessment and appellate orders passed without affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee are valid. The need for a fresh assessment with proper hearing.
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 22-02-2023 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 2012-13.
I have heard both the sides and gone through 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. The ld. CIT(A) also passed the ex parte order in the absence of the assessee. In view of the facts obtaining in the instant case, more specifically, when both the original and appellate orders have been passed ex parte, 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 point of view in the fresh assessment.
In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 18th May, 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 Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Aasha Industries vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Bharat Iron Scrap vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Mascot Constructions Co. And Another vs. The Commissioner Of Goods And Services Tax (GST) And AnotherBombay · 22 Oct 2026