What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It was held that the AO did not provide a proper opportunity of hearing, and thus the impugned order was set-aside.

The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was delayed by 29 days. The Assessing Officer (AO) had passed an ex-parte order without providing a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the AO provided a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee before passing an ex-parte assessment order.

Chandraprakash Motilal Sharma… vs ITO | ITAT Pune 2019

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

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Kulkarni

For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawli

आदेश / ORDER

PER R.S.SYAL, VP : This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order passed by the CIT(A)-1, Aurangabad on 30-03-2017 in relation to the assessment year 2009-10.

There is a delay of 29 days in presenting the appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee filed an affidavit dated 15-02-2019 explaining the reason for delay. I am satisfied

2 ITA No.1739/PUN/2017 Shri Chandraprakash Motilal Sharma

with the reason so given. Accordingly, the delay is condoned

and the appeal is admitted for disposal.

I have heard both the sides and perused the relevant

material on record. It is seen that the AO passed the order ex- parte qua the assessee. The ld. AR submitted that the AO did not give proper opportunity of hearing and decided the appeal

ex parte. 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 AO. I order accordingly and direct the

AO to make the assessment afresh as per law after allowing a

reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical

purposes.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 20th February, 2019

Sd/- (R.S.SYAL) उपा�य� उपा�य�/ VICE PRESIDENT उपा�य� उपा�य�

पुणे Pune; �दनांक Dated : 20th February, 2019 सतीश

ITA No.1739/PUN/2017 Shri Chandraprakash Motilal Sharma

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)-1, Aurangabad 4. The Pr. CIT-1, Aurangabad िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे “SMC” / 5. DR ‘SMC’, ITAT, Pune; गाड� फाईल / Guard file. 6. // True copy // आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार

// True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

Date 1. Draft dictated on 19-02-2019 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 19-02-2019 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the JM second member 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second JM Member. 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11. Date of dispatch of Order. *

CHANDRAPRAKASH MOTILAL SHARMA,JALNA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, JALNA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments