VINOD AMARNATH VOHRA,PANDHARPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2, PANDHARPUR

आदेश / ORDER

PER R.S. SYAL, VP : This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order passed by the CIT(Appeals)-9, Pune on 30.01.2018 in relation to the assessment year 2007-08.

2 ITA No. 578/PUN/2018 A.Y.2007-08

this case was completed on total income of Rs.7,63,746/- as against

the declared income of Rs.4,04,080/- by making an addition of

Rs.3,59,666/- u/s. 50C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter

referred to as ‘the Act’). The assessee approached the ld.

CIT(Appeals). In the meantime, the assessee applied for settlement of

the dispute under the Direct Tax Dispute Resolution Scheme, 2016

(DTDRS) and sought to withdraw the appeal before the ld. CIT

(Appeals) vide his letter dated 06.12.2016, a copy of which is placed

at page 2 of the paper book. Thereafter, the application of the

assessee under Direct Tax Dispute Resolution Scheme, 2016 was

rejected. The assessee intimated this fact to the ld. CIT(A) and the

same was also communicated directly to the ld. first appellate

authority by the designated authority on 6.9.2017. Despite this fact,

the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by noticing that

assessee had offered to withdraw the appeal on 06.12.2016.

available on record. It is axiomatic that if the application of the

assessee under Direct Tax Dispute Resolution Scheme, 2016 was

rejected, the appeal originally filed should have revived. The assessee

informed the fact of filing application under Direct Tax Dispute

Resolution Scheme, 2016 as well as its rejection to the ld. CIT

(Appeals). In such circumstances, ld. CIT(Appeals) should have

disposed of the appeal on merits, even if the assessee did not

respond to his notice. In view of the foregoing facts, I am of the

3 ITA No. 578/PUN/2018 A.Y.2007-08

considered opinion that the ends of justice would meet adequately if the impugned order is set-aside and the matter is restored to the file of ld. CIT(A). I order accordingly and direct him to decide the appeal

afresh as per law after allowing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. 4.

Order pronounced on 13th day of December, 2018.

Sd/- R.S. SYAL उपा�य� /VICE-PRESIDENT

पुणे / Pune; �दनांक / Dated : 13th December, 2018. SB आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of the Order forwarded to :

अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent 2. 3. The CIT (Appeals)-9, Pune. 4. The Pr. CIT-6, Pune. 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, “एक-सद�य” ब�च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 6.

// True Copy //

आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,

�नजी स�चव / Private Secretary आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.

4 ITA No. 578/PUN/2018 A.Y.2007-08

Date 1 Draft dictated on 12.12.2018 Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 12.12.2018 Sr. PS/PS 3 Draft proposed and placed JM/AM before the second Member 4 Draft discussed/approved by AM/JM second Member 5 Approved draft comes to the Sr. Sr. PS/PS PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr. PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of order Sr. PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr. PS/PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R 11 Date of dispatch of order

*