Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE
Before: SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM
आदेश / ORDER
PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(Appeals), Pune-5, Pune dated 15.06.2018 for the assessment year 2014- 15.
2 ITA No.1728/PUN/2018 A.Y.2014-15
Deviating from the grounds of appeal, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee
submitted that the assessee is engaged in the business of finance and real
estate and filed return of income declaring loss of Rs.2.92 Crores. During the
year under consideration, the assessee has shown loss under the head
“Income from Business”.
During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer invoked the
provisions of section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter
referred to as ‘the Act’) and made addition of Rs.2.87 Crores. At the end of
assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer computed total loss of Rs.5.14
Lakhs.
Aggrieved with the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before
the CIT(Appeals). However, neither the assessee nor his Authorized
Representative was appeared before the CIT(Appeals) to represent the case of
the assessee. A number of opportunities were granted to the assessee,
however, the assessee failed to comply with the same. Thereafter, the
CIT(Appeals) passed an ex-parte order and dismissed the appeal of the
assessee without going into the merits of the addition. The Ld. CIT(Appeals)
has passed an ex-parte order by placing reliance on the following decisions:
i) M/s. Chemipol Vs. Union of India & Ors. in Central Excise Appeal No.62 of 2009 vide judgment dated 17th September, 2009. ii) CIT Vs. S. Cheniappa Mudaliar, AIR 1969 SC 1068, iii) Sunderlal Mannalal Vs. Nandramdas Dwarkadas, AIR 1958 iv) CIT Vs. Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (Del.) v) CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattachargee & ANR 10 CTR 354
3 ITA No.1728/PUN/2018 A.Y.2014-15
Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee filed the
present appeal before us mentioning the issues relating to various five
grounds in the appeal on record.
Reading out of the said grounds of appeal, the Ld. Counsel submitted
that the matter may be remanded to the file of CIT(Appeals) for fresh
adjudication on merits after granting reasonable opportunity of hearing to
the assessee once again. Narrating the facts and difficulties of the assessee
for not making his appearance before the Ld. CIT(Appeals). The Ld. AR
submitted that it is all due to communication gap between the assessee and
the CIT(Appeals). Further, Ld. Counsel submitted that this time he shall
represent the case without fail. Referring to the provisions of Section 250(6)
of the Act, Ld. Counsel further submitted that the CIT(Appeals) could not
dismiss the appeal of the assessee merely relying on the judgment of CIT Vs.
Multiplan India Pvt. Ltd. (supra.) without adjudicating the issue on merits.
On the other hand, Ld. DR placed reliance on the orders of the
Authorities below.
Both sides heard. Orders of the Authorities below perused. I find that
the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) cannot be upheld as the issue on merits
were not adjudicated by him as per the provisions of section 250(6) of the
Act. Therefore, it is in the interest of justice, the matter needs to be
remanded to the file of Ld. CIT(Appeals) for fresh adjudication on merits.
Accordingly, I set aside the order of Ld. CIT(Appeals) and restore this issue to
the file of the Ld.CIT(Appeals) to adjudicate on merits after providing
reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. At the same time, I direct
the assessee to appear before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) with relevant documents
4 ITA No.1728/PUN/2018 A.Y.2014-15
and evidences in support of his case and represent his case on law/merits. In case of failure to appear, the CIT(Appeals) is free to decide the issue as he deems fit.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 9.
Order pronounced on 11th day of February, 2019.
Sd/- (डी.क�णाकरा राव/D. Karunakara Rao) लेखा सद�य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
पुणे / Pune; �दनांक / Dated : 11th February, 2019. SB आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of the Order forwarded to :
अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The CIT(Appeals), Pune-5, Pune. 4. The Pr. CIT, Pune-4, Pune. 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, “एक-सद�य” ब�च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 6.
// True Copy // आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,
�नजी स�चव /Private Secretary आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.
5 ITA No.1728/PUN/2018 A.Y.2014-15
Date 1 Draft dictated on 11.02.2019 Sr.PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 12.02.2019 Sr.PS/PS 3 Draft proposed and placed JM/AM before the second Member 4 Draft discussed/approved by AM/JM second Member 5 Approved draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of order Sr.PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr.PS/PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R 11 Date of dispatch of order