SHRI VIJAYPAL KISHORILAL SHARMA,PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE-8, PUNE
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE
Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
PER R. K. PANDA, VP :
The above two appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the separate orders dated 07.06.2024 of the Ld. CIT(A), Pune-11 relating to assessment years
2008-09 and 2009-10 respectively. For the sake of convenience, both these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
There is a delay of 97 days in filing of both the appeals before the Tribunal for which the assessee has filed condonation applications along with affidavits explaining the reasons for such delay which is due to medical reasons since the assessee was admitted in hospital. After considering the contents of the after hearing the Ld. DR, the delay in filing of the appeals is condoned and the appeals are admitted for adjudication.
First, we take up ITA No.2561/PUN/2024 for assessment year 2008-09 as the lead case.
Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the ex-parte order of the Ld. CIT(A) in dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee for want of prosecution.
Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and engaged in the business of land trader and engineering work. He filed his return of income on 30.09.2008 declaring total income of Rs.35,33,760/-. A survey action u/s 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) was conducted in this case on 09.03.2011 during which certain incriminating documents were impounded. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer, after recording reasons, reopened the assessment and notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 30.03.2013. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act on 19.03.2014 determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.1,01,18,830/- by making certain additions. 6. The assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, despite number of opportunities granted, the assessee did not respond to the notices for which the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution by relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B N Bhattacharjee & Anr (1979) 118 ITR 461 (SC), decision of Hon’ble Madhya 8. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and Ld. CIT(A) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us. It is an admitted fact that due to non-appearance of the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) despite number of opportunities granted, he passed the ex-parte order dismissing the appeal for want of prosecution. However, he has not adjudicated the issue on merit as prescribed under the provisions of section 250(6) of the Act which reads as under:
“250(1).
…
(6) The order of the [Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the] Commissioner
(Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision.”
9. Since it is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that given an opportunity, the assessee is in a position to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details before the Ld. CIT(A) and since the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided the appeal on merit, therefore, considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the Ld.
CIT(A) with a direction to decide the appeal on merit by passing a speaking order.
The assessee is also hereby directed to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) on the appointed date and make his submissions, if any, without seeking any adjournment under any pretext failing which the Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
10. After hearing both sides, we find the grounds raised in ITA
No.2562/PUN/2024 are identical to the grounds raised in ITA No.2561/PUN/2024. Following the same reasonings, we restore the issue in ITA No.2562/PUN/2024 to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the same on merit after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
11. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 22nd April, 2025. (VINAY BHAMORE)
VICE PRESIDENT
पुणे Pune; दिन ांक Dated : 22nd April, 2025
GCVSR
आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to:
अपीलार्थी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent
4. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune DR, ITAT, ‘B’ Bench, Pune 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file.
आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,
////
Senior Private Secretary
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ,पुणे
/ ITAT, Pune
S.No.
Details
Date
Initials
Designation
1
Draft dictated on 21.04.2025
Sr. PS/PS
2
Draft placed before author
21.04.2025
Sr. PS/PS
3
Draft proposed & placed before the Second Member
JM/AM
4
Draft discussed/approved by Second
Member
AM/AM
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