What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the ends of justice would be met by setting aside the impugned order. The matter was restored to the AO for a fresh assessment after providing the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

The assessee's appeal was against an ex-parte order by the CIT(A). The assessee claimed to have explained cash deposits with supporting cash book entries, but these were ignored by the AO and CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte orders passed by the lower authorities, without considering the assessee's explanations and evidence, were justified.

Satywan Dhondiba Dhormare, Latur vs ITO | ITAT Pune 2018

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

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL

For Respondent: Shri M.K. Verma

आदेश / ORDER

PER R.S.SYAL, VP :

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A)-I, Aurangabad on 21-12-2017 in relation to the assessment year 2012-13.

I have heard the ld. DR and perused the relevant material on record. There is no appearance from the side of the assessee. It is seen that the AO as well as the ld. CIT(A) have passed the orders ex-parte qua the assessee. The assessee vide the grounds has assailed that he explained the cash

2 ITA No.445/PUN/2018 Satywan Dhondiba Dhormare

deposits in his saving bank account with supporting entries in

the cash book, however, the AO ignored the same and

completed the assessment ex parte. The first appellate authority also decided the appeal ex parte. In view of the foregoing facts, I am of the 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 AO. I order

accordingly and direct the AO to make the assessment afresh

after allowing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the

assessee. It is made clear that in such fresh proceedings, the

assessee will be at liberty to lead any fresh evidence in support

of his case, as desired expedient.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical

purposes.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 04th December, 2018.

Sd/- (R.S.SYAL) उपा�य� उपा�य�/ VICE PRESIDENT उपा�य� उपा�य�

पुणे Pune; �दनांक Dated : 04th December, 2018 सतीश

ITA No.445/PUN/2018 Satywan Dhondiba Dhormare

आदेश क� क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order is forwarded क� क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत 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-2, 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. *

SATYWAN DHONDIBA DHORMARE,LATUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4, LATUR

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments