DATE PROPERTY TRUST,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 12(1), PUNE
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”एस एम सी” Ɋायपीठ पुणेमŐ।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE
BEFORE DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.496/PUN/2025
िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year: 2023-24
Date Property Trust,
265 A/3, Yashwant Building,
Shaniwarpeth,
Opp.Omkareshwar Temple,
Lokmanyanagar, S.O.Pune,
Pune – 411030. V s
The Income tax Officer,
Ward-12(1), Pune.
PAN: AAATD4736C
Appellant/ Assessee
Respondent / Revenue
Assessee by Smt.Deepa Khare – AR
Revenue by Shri Harish Bist – Addl.CIT(DR)
Date of hearing
03/04/2025
Date of pronouncement 04/04/2025
आदेश/ ORDER
PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of ld.Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-2,
Ahmedabad passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961,
30.12.2024 for Assessment Year 2023-24. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :
ITA No.496/PUN/2025 [A]
2
“1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in taxing income of the trust at the maximum marginal rate instead of slab rate as applicable to AOP confirming THE TAX DEMAND OF Rs.48,408/-.
The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in levying tax liability on the trust of Rs.48,408/- under the provisions of the Income Tax Act.
The Deputy Director of Income Tax, CPC Bengaluru has erred in levying interest u/s 234(B) of Rs.2,653/- and interest u/s 234(C) amounting to Rs.1,915/- of the Income Tax Act.
The appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete or Substitute all or any of the grounds of appeal.
Such other order or orders may be passed as deemed fit and proper.
Submission of ld.AR :
Ld.AR submitted that ld.CIT(A) has not decided the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee on merit. Ld.AR submitted that ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee stating that Assessee failed to file the evidences. Ld.AR submitted that the Trust was formed in 1889. The Trustee is 70 year old, is not familiar with computer operations, therefore, the notices issued by ld.CIT(A) could not be complied. Ld.AR submitted that one more opportunity may be given to explain the facts before the ld.CIT(A). Ld.AR submitted that the issue involved is that under section 143(1) for A.Y.2023-24 Revenue has taxed assessee’s income at maximum marginal rate without giving any valid reason. Assessee had filed Return of Income on 24.07.2023, whereas due date for filing return was 31.07.2023, thus, return was filed within time. Ld.AR submitted that therefore, there is no juri iction under section 143(1) to tax the income under Maximum Marginal Rate. Ld.AR
ITA No.496/PUN/2025 [A]
3
relied on the order of ITAT Pune in National Association of Interlocking
Surgeons Vs. ITO in ITA No.2816, 2817 & 2560/PUN/2024 dated
12.02.2025. Submission of ld.DR :
Ld.DR for the Revenue relied on the order of the AO and ld.CIT(A).
Findings and Analysis :
We have heard both the parties and perused the records. In this case, ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated the grounds of appeal raised by assessee. It is an admitted fact that assessee failed to reply the notices issued by ld.CIT(A). However, as per section 250 of the Act, it is mandatory for ld.CIT(A) to decide the grounds of appeals on merits giving reasons for the decision. In this case, ld.CIT(A) has merely confirmed the order under section 143(1) without giving reasons and without discussing the merits of the case.
1 The Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)(Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) as under : Quote, “8.From the aforesaid provisions, it is very clear once an appeal is preferred before the CIT(A), then in disposing of the appeal, he is obliged to make such further inquiry that he thinks fit or direct the Assessing Officer to make further inquiry and report the result of the same to him as found in Section 250(4) of the Act.
Further Section 250(6) of the Act obliges the CIT(A) to dispose of an appeal in writing after stating the points for determination and then render a decision on each of the points which arise for consideration
ITA No.496/PUN/2025 [A]
4
with reasons in support. Section 251(1)(a) and (b) of the Act provide that while disposing of appeal the CIT(A) would have the power to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul an assessment and/or penalty.
Besides Explanation to sub-section (2) of Section 251 of the Act also makes it clear that while considering the appeal, the CIT(A) would be entitled to consider and decide any issue arising in the proceedings before him in appeal filed for its consideration, even if the issue is not raised by the appellant in its appeal before the CIT(A). Thus once an assessee files an appeal under Section 246A of the Act, it is not open to him as of right to withdraw or not press the appeal. In fact the CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits. In fact with effect from 1st
June, 2001 the power of the CIT(A) to set aside the order of the Assessing Officer and restore it to the Assessing Officer for passing a fresh order stands withdrawn.
Therefore, it would be noticed that the powers of the CIT(A) is coterminous with that of the Assessing Officer i.e. he can do all that Assessing Officer could do. Therefore just as it is not open to the Assessing Officer to not complete the assessment by allowing the assessee to withdraw its return of income, it is not open to the assessee in appeal to withdraw and/or the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal on account of non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee. This is amply clear from the Section 251(1)(a) and (b) and Explanation to Section 251(2) of the Act which requires the CIT(A) to apply his mind to all the issues which arise from the impugned order before him whether or not the same has been raised by the appellant before him. Accordingly, the law does not empower the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal for non- prosecution as is evident from the provisions of the Act.” Unquote.
2. Thus, the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has categorically held that ld.CIT(A) has to decide the appeal on merit and ld.CIT(A) does not have any power to dismiss appeal for non-prosecution.
In view of the above, the order of the ld.CIT(A)/ADDL/JCIT(A) is set-aside to ld.CIT(A)/ADDL/JCIT(A) for denovo adjudication. The ld.CIT(A) ld.CIT(A)/ADDL/JCIT(A) shall provide opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Assessee shall ITA No.496/PUN/2025 [A]
5
file necessary documents before the ld.CIT(A)/ADDL/JCIT(A).
Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 4th April, 2025. (VINAY BHAMORE) (DIPAK P.RIPOTE)
JUDICIAL MEMBER
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 4th April, 2025/ SGR
आदेशकᳱᮧितिलिपअᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant.
2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent.
3. The CIT(A), concerned.
4. The Pr. CIT, concerned.
5. िवभागीयᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “एस एम सी” बᱶच,
पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune.
6. गाडᭅफ़ाइल / Guard File.
आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,
////
Senior Private Secretary
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे/ITAT, Pune.