NIKHIL GAJANAN PATIL,KADEGAON SANGLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5 SANGLI, SANGLI, MAHARASHTRA

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE

BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER

आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1569/PUN/2024
िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2015-16

Nikhil Gajanan Patil,
At Post Kadegaon, Tal.
Palus, Dist. Sangli- 415303. PAN : CBRPP3286K
Vs. ITO, Ward-5, Sangli.
Appellant

Respondent

आदेश / ORDER

PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 28.05.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2015-16. 2. When the appeal was called for hearing, neither anybody appeared on behalf of the appellant-assessee nor any adjournment application was filed despite due service of notice of hearing.
Assessee by : None
Revenue by : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Date of hearing
: 29.01.2025
Date of pronouncement : 31.01.2025
2
Therefore, we proceed to dispose of this appeal after hearing Ld.
DR as well as on the basis of material available on record.
3. Facts of the case, in brief, are, that the assessee is an individual & has not furnished his return of income for the period under consideration. The case was reopened u/s 147 of the IT Act on the basis of information available on insight portal. Notices u/s 148, 142(1) and show cause notice u/s 144 respectively were issued to the assessee. Since the assessee remained non-compliant, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144
r.w.s. 144B of the IT Act determining the total income at Rs.99,16,734/- as against non-filing of return of income by the assessee.
4. Since the assessee again remained absent, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
5. Ld. DR relied on the orders passed by the subordinate authorities and requested to confirm the same.
6. We have heard Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. We find that the assessment order was passed ex-parte and even in the first appellate proceedings, the assessee did not appear.
3
Consequently, both the orders were passed in the absence of the assessee. From the statement of facts available in the case record, we find that the mother and father of the assessee were murdered sometime back in an incident of robbery in his house due to which the assessee was not in sound state of mind. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, without going into the merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and restore the matter back to his file for deciding the appeal afresh as per fact and law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and also after calling the remand report from the Assessing Officer on the basis of submission, if any, made by the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld.
CIT(A)/NFAC in this regard and produce requisite documents/evidences/explanations in support of grounds of appeal, without taking any adjournment under any pretext, otherwise Ld.
CIT(A)/NFAC shall be at liberty to pass an appropriate order as per law. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are partly allowed.
4
7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 31st day of January, 2025. (MANISH BORAD)
JUDICIAL MEMBER

पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 31st January, 2025. Sujeet
आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant.
2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent.
3. The Pr. CIT concerned.
4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” बᱶच,
पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune.

////
Senior Private Secretary

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.