Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed his return of income declaring Rs. 20,50,000, which was processed under Section 143(1) and intimation showed Rs. 2,05,000 as income due to a typing error. The assessee appealed to the Ld. CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal ex-parte as the assessee remained absent. The appeal is against this dismissal.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay of 375 days in filing the appeal. Considering the ex-parte order and the assessee's request for another opportunity, the Tribunal set aside the order and remanded the matter back to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be set aside and the appeal remanded for fresh adjudication due to absence of the assessee?
Sections Cited
143(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE
Before: SHRI DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
Assessment Year : 2019-20 Sukhanand Bhagvat Savase, Vs. ITO, Ward-1, Latur. Sawase Galli, Murud, Tq. & Dist. Latur- 413510. PAN : HSOPS1105P Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Vinayak Tele Revenue by : Shri Arvind Renge Date of hearing : 31.07.2025 Date of pronouncement : 31.07.2025 आदेश / ORDER
PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 05.03.2024 passed by Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-4, Kolkata [‘Ld CIT(A)’] for the assessment year 2019-20.
There is delay of 375 days in filing of the present appeal. We are satisfied with the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation, duly supported by an affidavit that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. After hearing Ld. DR, we condone the delay of 375 days and proceed to adjudicate the appeal.
3. Facts of the case, in brief, are, that the assessee is an individual and has furnished his return of income declaring income of Rs.20,50,000/- which was processed u/s 143(1) of the IT Act. After receiving the intimation, the assessee found that the income returned was only Rs.2,05,000/- whereas it was typed as Rs.20,50,000/- in the return of income. Therefore, the assessee furnished appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Since the assessee remained absent, Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record including the paper book furnished by the assessee. It is the sole prayer of the counsel of the assessee that if one more opportunity of hearing is provided to the assessee he will substantiate his case before Ld. CIT(A) by furnishing evidences/explanations/submissions in support of grounds of appeal
5. Since Ld. CIT(A) has decided the appeal ex-parte, only on the basis of statement of facts and grounds of appeal mentioned in memo of appeal i.e. Form No.35, therefore, considering the totality of the facts and in the interest justice, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the ex-parte order passed by Ld. CIT(A) and remand the