M/S. PADMAVATI DEVELOPERS,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-9(3), PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1955/PUN/2019Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 June 2022AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) order might have been passed without proper notice to the assessee. Therefore, the case was remanded for a fresh decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns the disallowance of a claim under Section 80-IB(10). The CIT(A) order was passed without clear indication of whether the assessee received the last hearing notice.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in upholding the disallowance of the Section 80-IB(10) deduction without proper notice to the assessee. Whether the matter requires a fresh adjudication by the CIT(A).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80-IB(10),Section 143(3),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, PUNE

For Appellant: Shri Krishna Gujarathi
For Respondent: Shri B. Koteshwara Rao

M/s. Padmavati Developers Empire Estate, CTS No. 4510/1 Chinchwad, Pune-411 019 PAN; AAGEP 7344 G Appellant Vs. The I.T.O. Ward 9(3) Pune. Respondent Appellant by : Shri Krishna Gujarathi Respondent by : Shri B. Koteshwara Rao Date of Hearing : 01-06-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 06-06-2022 ORDER

PER S.S. GODARA, JM :

1.

This assessee‟s appeal for AY 2013-14 is against the order of the CIT(A)-8, Pune dated 01-10-2019 passed in case No. case No. PN/CIT(A)-8/ITO Ward 9(3)/863 involving proceedings under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 196, in short “the Act”.

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

Coming to the assessee‟s sole substantive grievance pleaded herein that the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the Assessing Officer‟s action in disallowing its claim u/s 80-IB(10) of Rs. 13,65,72,572/-, we note at the outset with able assistance of both the parties that there is no indication in the lower appellate authorities discussion tabulated on page 4 that the former had been served with the last hearing notice dated 14-8-2019 or not. This is coupled with the fact that the assessee has placed on record before us the tribunal‟s order dated 13-05-2022 holding it eligible for the impugned deduction on proportionate basis regarding Sector 7 of the corresponding housing project.

4.

Faced with this situation, we are of the opinion that larger interest of justice would met in case the CIT (A) re-decides the entire foregoing issue afresh as contemplated u/s 250 of the Act after framing the points for determination followed by detailed discussion. Needful may be done after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing. Ordered accordingly.

Padmavati Developers A.Y. 2013-14

5.

This assessee‟s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.

More judgments on Section 80-IB(10)

All 100 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80-IB(10) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →