What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the matter to the file of the AO. The AO was directed to make a fresh assessment after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

The assessee's appeal was heard ex-parte by the Assessing Officer (AO) and the CIT(A) without a remand report. The assessee did not appear before the tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte assessment and the CIT(A)'s order without a remand report were just and proper, and if the assessee should be given a fresh opportunity to present their case.

Imroz Khan Mohiyoddin Khan, Nanded vs ITO | ITAT Pune 2018

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

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL

For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Gawali

आदेश क� क� क� �ितिलिप क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order is forwarded अ�ेिषत आदेश आदेश आदेश to :

अपीलाथ� / The Appellant; 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent; 3. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT (Appeals)-1, Aurangabad 4. आयकर आयु� / The Pr. CIT-1, Aurangabad 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे “SMC” / DR ‘SMC’, ITAT, Pune; 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file.

// True copy //

आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, आदेशानुसार

// True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

Date 1. Draft dictated on 03-12-18 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 03-12-18 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on 7. File sent to the Bench Clerk 8. Date on which file goes to the AR 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk. 10. Date of dispatch of Order. *

IMROZ KHAN MOHIYODDIN KHAN,NANDED vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(2), NANDED

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments