RAMESH M. POKALE,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 6 (2), PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 385/PUN/2020Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 June 2022AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order due to non-adjudication on merits and restored the matter for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to appear with relevant evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 33 days, which was condoned. However, the assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A) or provide evidence, leading to an ex-parte dismissal of the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution without adjudicating on merits, and if a final opportunity should be granted to the assessee.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, PUNE

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI

For Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani

आदेश / ORDER

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM :

1.

This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 13-12-2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Pune [‘CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2011-12.

2.

We note that this appeal was filed with a delay of 33 days. After hearing ld. DR, we find that the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide which really prevented the assessee to file the present appeal in time. Therefore, the delay of 33 days are condoned.

3.

At the time of hearing there was no appearance from the assessee nor through her representative and we observe that the order passed by the CIT(A) is an ex-parte order and liabilities of the assessee were not adjudicated upon. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of non-prosecution. We proceed with the case after hearing the submissions of ld. DR wherein it is evident that neither the assessee nor its authorized representative attended and filed the details evidences in support of appeal on merits. Therefore, the ld. DR vehemently opposed the prayer of providing any further opportunity to the assessee for representing his case on merits before the First Appellate Authority.

4.

We have perused the case records and heard the ld. DR. We find that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of non prosecution. It is, therefore, clear that rights and liabilities of the parties were not adjudicated upon on merits and we are of the considered view that one final opportunity needs to be given to the assessee to represent his case on merits so that justice can be delivered.

5.

In view of the matter, we set aside the order of ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to his file for fresh adjudication after providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee. At the same time, we direct the assessee to present himself before the ld. CIT(A) with relevant documentary evidences to represent his case on merits. Any service of notice is dispensable.

6.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 13th June, 2022.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →