What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for adjudication afresh. The assessee is responsible for proving the reasons for delay and the merits of the case within three effective opportunities.

The assessee's appeal for AY 2013-14 was filed with a delay of 360 days. The CIT(A) refused to condone this delay without verifying the service of hearing notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in refusing to condone the delay without proper verification of service of notices. The need for fresh adjudication on merits.

Sachin Ashok Dedge vs ITO | ITAT Pune 2022

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

Before: SHRI S.S. GODARA & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

For Appellant: Shri D.R. Barve

For Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani

आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: अपीऱधर्थी / The Appellant; 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent; 2. 3. The CIT(A)-4, Pune 4. The Pr.CIT-3, Pune 5. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, पुणे “B” / DR „B‟, ITAT, Pune गार्ड फाईल / Guard file 6. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

Date 1. Draft dictated on 14-07-2022 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 25-07-2022 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the JM second member 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second JM Member. 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11. Date of dispatch of Order.

SACHIN ASHOK DEDGE,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 6 (2), PUNE

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments