What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the matter to the CIT(A). The CIT(A) was directed to decide the appeals afresh after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

The assessee's appeals were dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) for non-attendance. The assessee's representative argued for a fresh opportunity due to sufficient cause for absence.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted a fresh opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A) when there was a sufficient cause for their absence during the original hearing.

M/S. Sahyadari Corporation vs DCIT | ITAT Pune 2020

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL

For Appellant: Shri Deepa Khare

For Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe

These four appeals by the assessee arise out of the consolidated ex parte order passed by the CIT(A)-12, Pune on 24-06-2019 in relation to the assessment years 2010-11, 2011- 12, 2012-13 & 2014-15. Since common issue is raised in these appeals, I am, therefore, proceeding to dispose them off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience.

2 M/s. Sahyadri Corporation, A.Yrs. 2010-11 to 2012-13 & 2014-15

I have heard both the sides and perused the relevant material on record. It is seen that the ld. CIT(A) has passed the consolidated order in relation to the aforenoted assessment years ex-parte qua the assessee. The ld. AR submitted that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeals of the assessee, albeit on merits, for non-attendance when there was sufficient cause for the same. The ld. AR requested the Bench to grant one more opportunity so as enable the assessee to be present before the ld. CIT(A). In view of the foregoing facts, I am of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would meet adequately if the impugned order is set-aside and the matter is restored to the file of ld. CIT(A). I order accordingly and direct the ld. CIT(A) to decide the appeals afresh as per law after allowing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 17th January, 2020. Sd/- (R.S.SYAL) उपा�य� उपा�य�/ VICE PRESIDENT उपा�य� उपा�य� पुणे Pune; �दनांक Dated : 17th January, 2020 सतीश

3 M/s. Sahyadri Corporation, A.Yrs. 2010-11 to 2012-13 & 2014-15

आदेश क� क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order is forwarded to : क� क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषत आदेश आदेश आदेश अपीलाथ� / The Appellant; 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent; 2. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / 3. The CIT (Appeals)-12, Pune 4. The Pr. CIT Central, Pune िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे “SMC” / 5. DR ‘SMC’, ITAT, Pune; गाड� फाईल / Guard file. 6. // True copy // आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, आदेशानुसार

M/S. SAHYADARI CORPORATION,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -2 (1), PUNE

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments