SUBHADRA EDUCATION & RESEARCH CENTRE,PUNE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 40/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 May 2025AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee was not provided a proper opportunity of hearing by the CIT(A)/NFAC. Therefore, the ex-parte order was set aside, and the matter was remanded back for a fresh decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a trust providing education, filed its return declaring Nil income. The Assessing Officer disallowed depreciation claimed by the trust and assessed income accordingly. The CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte due to the assessee's absence.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A)/NFAC was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 11(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Digambar Surwase
For Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Hearing: 05.03.2025Pronounced: 16.05.2025

Assessment Year : 2020-21 Subhadra Education & Vs. Assessment Unit, Research Centre, Income Tax Department, B-102, Landmark Garden, NFAC. Near Bishop School, Kalyaninagar, Pune- 411014. PAN : AARTS8054P Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Digambar Surwase Revenue by : Shri Arvind Desai Date of hearing : 05.03.2025 Date of pronouncement : 16.05.2025 आदेश / ORDER

PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20.09.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2020-21.

2.

There is a delay of 50 days in filing of the present appeal. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay along with an affidavit. We are satisfied with the explanation of the assessee that he was prevented by reasonable cause for not filing the present appeal within prescribed time limit. Ld. DR raised no serious objection to the condonation request made by the assessee. Accordingly, the delay of 50 days is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication.

3.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a trust engaged in providing pre-primary and primary education for the benefit of all sections of society and has furnished its return of income on 16.12.2020 declaring Nil income. The case was selected for scrutiny and notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) were issued respectively. Not being satisfied with the reply of the assessee trust on the issue of depreciation claimed on assets the Assessing Officer disallowed the depreciation claimed at Rs.70,76,164/- u/s 11(6) of the IT Act and completed the assessment u/s 143(3) by determining the total income at Rs.70,76,164/- as against the income returned by the assessee at Rs.Nil.

4.

Since the assessee remained absent, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal and consequently confirmed the order passed Assessing Officer. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.

5.

Ld. AR appearing from the side of the assessee submitted before us that the ex-parte order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is unjustified. Ld. AR submitted before the Bench that the Chartered Accountant who was looking after the income tax matter was busy in treatment of his family member who was suffering from cancer and in the month of September, 2024 was continuously admitted in the hospital and due to this reason the hearing notices issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC could not be attended by him. Accordingly, Ld. AR prayed before the Bench to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and further requested to provide one opportunity of hearing to the assessee so that the assessee can substantiate its grounds of appeal

before him.

6. Ld. DR appearing from the side of the Revenue relied on the orders passed by the subordinate authorities and requested to confirm the same.

7. We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record including the paper books furnished by the assessee along with written submission. It was the main prayer of the assessee that Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has decided the appeal ex-parte i.e. without hearing the appellant and therefore one opportunity may kindly be provided to the assessee to substantiate the grounds of appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Considering the totality of the facts of the case, we find force in the arguments of Ld. Counsel of the assessee that proper opportunity of hearing was not provided to the assessee by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and it would be in the interest of justice, if the assessee is allowed one opportunity to produce supporting documents/evidences/explanation in support of grounds of appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Accordingly, without going into merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to set- aside the ex-parte order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and remand the mater back to him with a direction to decide the appeal afresh as per fact & law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in this regard and produce documents/evidences/explanation in support of grounds of appeal without taking any adjournment under any pretext, otherwise Ld.

More judgments on Section 11(6)

All 264 judgments and leading authorities on Section 11(6) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →