ERIC MARIO RAJIV FONSECA,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, (IT) -4, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 946/PUN/2019Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 May 2022AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) violated principles of natural justice by not providing sufficient opportunity for hearing. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh disposal.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against a penalty order confirmed by the CIT(A). The CIT(A) disposed of the appeal ex-parte after issuing only one notice of hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) provided sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee before passing an ex-parte order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI

For Appellant: Shri Gajanan Shendye
For Respondent: Shri S. P. Walimbe
Hearing: 19.05.2022Pronounced: 20.05.2022

ORDER

More judgments on Section 271A

All 701 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →