NANASAHEB KUNDALIK BELAGE,SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(5), AURANGABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 396/PUN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 May 2023AY 2012-133 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay and admitted the appeal. Considering that both the assessment and appellate orders were passed ex parte, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed 325 days late, and the original assessment order was passed ex parte due to the assessee's inability to disclose the source of cash deposits. The CIT(A) also passed an ex parte order.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex parte orders passed by the lower authorities were justified and if the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL

For Respondent: Shri Suresh Gaikwad

आदेश / ORDER

PER R.S. SYAL, VP:

1.

This appeal by the assessee arises out of the ex parte order dated 22-03-2022 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.

2.

The appeal is time barred by 325 days. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay. I am satisfied with the reasons so stated. The delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for disposal on merits.

3.

I have heard the ld. DR and gone through the relevant material on record. There is no appearance from the side of assessee despite notice. I am, therefore, proceeding to dispose the appeal ex parte qua the assessee.

4.

It is seen that the assessment order in this case was passed u/s.144 r.w.s.147 of the Act assessing total income at Rs.12,90,000/- towards inability of the assessee to disclose the source of cash deposited in bank. No return was filed by the assessee. 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.

5.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 16th May, 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 →