MITESH NITIN SHAH,DHULE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD- 1, DHULE

ITA 84/PUN/2022Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 March 2022AY 2017-184 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It was held that it would be just and fair to set aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the Assessing Officer.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 87 days, attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic. The original assessment order and the CIT(A) order were passed ex parte. The assessee claimed a lack of proper opportunity to present their case.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity of being heard before the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A). Whether the ex parte orders passed were justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

438 ITR 296
438 ITR 296 · 2021 · SC
196 citing
432 ITR 206
432 ITR 206 · 2020 · SC
182 citing
421 ITR 314
421 ITR 314 · SC
172 citing

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

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL

For Appellant: Shri Pramod Shingte

For Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe

आदेश / ORDER

PER R.S.SYAL, VP : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(Appeals) - National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called `the Act’) on 06-09-2021 in relation to the assessment year 2017-18. 2. There is a delay of 87 days in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. AR stated that the delay in filing the appeal was caused due to Covid pandemic situation prevailing in the country at the material time. I am satisfied with the reason so stated. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 438 ITR 296 (SC) read with judgment in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 432 ITR 206 (SC) dated 08-03-2021 and 421 ITR 314 has taken a suo motu cognizance of the situation arising out of the challenges faced by the country on account of COVID-19 Virus and resultant difficulties that could be faced by the litigants across the country and accordingly extended the time limit for filing of the appeals. I, therefore condone the delay in filing the instant appeal and admit the same for disposal on merits.

I have heard both the sides and gone through the relevant material on record. It is seen that the assessment order in this case was passed ex parte u/s.144 of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) also passed the ex parte in the absence of the assessee. The ld. AR submitted that the assessee was not given proper opportunity of presenting his case before the AO. It was, therefore, prayed that one more opportunity be accorded to the assessee to represent his case in a proper manner. The ld. AR undertook that the assessee will put in proper representation before the AO if the matter is restored. In view of the above factual background prevailing in the extant case, I am 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 AO with a direction to pass the assessment order afresh as per law after allowing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Needless to say, the assessee will be at liberty to lead any fresh evidence in support his point of view in the fresh assessment. I order accordingly.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 30th March, 2022.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →