HORIZON DEVELOPERS,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, HQ-3(2), PUNE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 562/PUN/2022Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 October 2022AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the NFAC violated principles of natural justice by not granting an adjournment and disposing of the appeal exparte. Therefore, the order of the NFAC was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the NFAC was dismissed exparte without considering their request for adjournment. The NFAC also confirmed an addition of Rs. 16,51,692/- as deemed rent.

What were the issues?

Whether the NFAC erred in dismissing the appeal exparte without granting an opportunity of hearing and considering the adjournment request. Whether the addition of deemed rent was correctly confirmed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 23

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES, PUNE

Before: SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa Khare
For Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav

This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated14-06-2022 for A.Y. 2015- 16 as per the following grounds of appeal.

1.

The ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal exparte without considering the request for adjournment by the appellant.

2. The ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of Rs. 16,51,692/- as addition of deemed rent u/s 23 of the Act. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify or substitute any grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.”

2.

This is an exparte order passed by the NFAC, Delhi. The rights and liabilities of the parties have not been substantially adjudicated on merits. That, at the time of hearing, the ld. Counsel submitted that the NFAC, Delhi has disposed off the appeal without granting proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee and has also violated the principles of natural justice by not granting of one adjournment. The ld. A.R also filed a copy of the E-mail correspondence where it is evident that the adjournment filed by the assessee was placed on 2 ITA 562 of 2022 Horizon Developers A.Y. 2015-16 record for consideration by the NFAC, Delhi. In this scenario the assessee was unable to represent its case on merits before the NFAC, Delhi and in the interest of justice, considering the entire facts and circumstances and also for the fact that Income-tax Act is a welfare legislation, I am of the considered view that the order of the NFAC, Delhi should be set aside and the matter should be remanded back to the file of the NFAC, Delhi for re-adjudication on merits considering the submissions of the assessee and as per law while complying with the principles of natural justice.

3.

The ld. D.R did not raise any objection if the matter is to be restore back to the file of the NFAC, Delhi. In view thereof, I set aside the order of the NFAC, Delhi and remand the matter back to its file as hereinabove mentioned.

4.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on this 21st October 2022.

More judgments on Section 23

All 564 judgments and leading authorities on Section 23 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →