What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It was held that the impugned order of the CIT(A) should be set aside and the matter remitted back for a fresh decision.

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT with a significant delay. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) dismissed their appeal without providing an adequate opportunity of hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without granting adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

M/S. Veremax Glazing and Windows… vs ITO | ITAT Pune 2022

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY

For Appellant: Shri Pramod Shingte

For Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani

आदेश / ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the ex parte order dated 25-01-2017 passed by the CIT(A)-13, Pune in relation to the assessment year 2012-13. 2. There is a delay of 898 days in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay. We are satisfied with the reasons. The delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing.

M/s. Veremax Glazing and Windows Systems Pvt. Ltd.,

We have heard both the sides and perused the relevant material on record. At the outset, the ld. AR submitted that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without granting adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. He requested that the matter may be remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A). The ld. DR did not raise any serious objection. In view of the above factual background of the extant case, we are of the opinion that it would be just and fair if the impugned order is set-aside and the matter is remitted to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide it afresh after allowing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. We order accordingly.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 22nd April, 2022.

Sd/- Sd/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) (R.S.SYAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; �दनांक Dated : 22nd April, 2022 Satish

M/s. Veremax Glazing and Windows Systems Pvt. Ltd.,

M/S. VEREMAX GLAZING AND WINDOWS SYSTEMS PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 10 (1), PUNE

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments