SMT. SARITA VEMULA,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-6(4), SURAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1169/AHD/2015Status: PendingITAT Surat25 January 2019AY 2008-092 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the issue to the file of the AO. The assessee was directed to participate fully in the proceedings.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against an ex-parte order passed by the AO and sustained by the CIT(A). The assessee claimed to have been prevented by a reasonable cause from appearing before the authorities.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte order passed by the AO was justified and whether the penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) was sustainable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 271(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT BENCH, SURAT

Before: SMT. DIVA SINGH & SHRI O.P.MEENA

Hearing: 10.01.2019

Smt.Sarita Venkatesh Vemula Vs. ITO, Ward-6(4), Surat /ITA No.1571& 1169/Ahd/2012, 15/A.Y’s.2008-09 Page 1 of 2 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,सुरत �यायपीठ, सुरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT �ीमती िदवा िसंह, �ाियक सद� तथा �ी ओ.पी.मीना, लेखा सद� के सम� BEFORE SMT. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं./I.T.A. No’s.1571/AHD/2012 & 1169/Ahd/2015 िनधा�रण वष�/Assessment Years : 2008-09 Smt.Sarita Venkatesh Vemula, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, L-7, Hariom Market, Ward-6(4), Surat. Textile Market, Ring Road, Surat. & The Commissioner of Income [PAN: ACLPV 1804 E] Tax (Appeals)-1, Surat अपीलाथ� Appellant ��यथ�/Respondent Shri Rhytham Dilip Jain िनधा�रती क� ओर से /Assessee by Shri P.S.Choudhary – Sr.DR राज�व क� ओर से /Revenue by सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing: 10.01.2019 उ�ोषणा क� तारीख/Pronouncement on 25.01.2019 आदेश /O R D E R PER DIVA SINGH, JM: 1. Both these appeals have been filed by the assessee assailing the orders of the CIT(A)-IV, Surat and CIT(A)1, Surat dated 16.02.2012 and 11.03.2015 respectively pertaining to 2008-09 assessment years passed in the quantum appeal and penalty proceedings. Since both these appeals were argued together, accordingly a common order is being passed.

2.

Taking up ITA No.1571/Ahd/2012 we note that although the assessee has agitated against the addition sustained by the CIT(A), however, the parties were heard only in respect of Ground No.1 which reads as under : “ 1. The Learned CIT Appeal erred in dismissing Ex-parte Order u/s.144, without considering that the Appellant was prevented by reasonable cause.” 3. The ld.AR inviting attention to the impugned order submitted that ex- parte order upholding the additions made by the AO has been passed wherein the assessee had challenged the ex-parte order u/s.144 passed by the AO. It was his submission that since in the facts of the present case in the absence of any relevant discussion in the orders it would be in the interest of justice to restore the issue to the AO. Considering the facts the said prayer was not opposed by the ld.Sr.DR.

We have heard the submissions and perused the material available on 4. record. The record shows that the Assessing Officer required the assessee to furnish relevant details. In the absence of any representation total purchase made were added to the income of the assessee. In the proceedings before the CIT(A) the case was fixed for hearing on 15.12.2012

Smt.Sarita Venkatesh Vemula Vs. ITO, Ward-6(4), Surat /ITA No.1571& 1169/Ahd/2012, 15/A.Y’s.2008-09 Page 2 of 2 and in the absence of any adjournment application the impugned order was passed. In the light of these facts accepting the prayer of the parties before the Bench the impugned order is set-aside back to the file of the AO with a direction to pass a speaking order in accordance with law. The assessee in its own interest is advised to participate fully and fairly in the proceedings as failing which we make it clear the AO would be at liberty to pass an order on the basis of material available on record in accordance with law.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

6.

Since in ITA NO.1169/Ahd/2015 the assessee assails the action of the CIT(A) in upholding the penalty imposed u/s.271(1)(c) and considering the fact that quantum appeals stands set-aside the said issue is also restored back to the file of the AO with a direction to pass an order in accordance with law. Said order was pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing itself.

7.

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

8.

The order pronounced in the open court on 25-01-2019.

Sd/- Sd/- (ओ.पी.मीना/O.P.MEENA) (�ीमती िदवा िसंह /DIVA SINGH) लेखासद�यकेसम� /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (�याियकसद�यतथा/JUDICIAL MEMBER) सुरत/ Surat, �दनांक Dated: 25th January, 2019/S.Gangadhara Rao, Sr.PS Copy of order sent to- Assessee/AO/Pr. CIT/ CIT (A)/ ITAT (DR)/Guard file of ITAT. By order / / TRUE COPY / / Assistant Registrar, Surat

More judgments on Section 271(1)(c)

All 25,141 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271(1)(c) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →