RAJU LEKHARAJ TANWANI,AURANGABAD vs. ITO CIRCLE 1, AURANGABAD
Facts
The assessee, Raju Lekhraj Tanwani, filed an appeal against the order dated 22.09.2025 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for Assessment Year 2018-19. The appeal arose from an assessment order dated 03.03.2021 where a disallowance of Rs.6,96,160/- relating to depreciation was made. The assessee contended that the impugned order was ex-parte and they did not receive a fair opportunity of hearing before the CIT(A), having failed to appear on earlier hearing dates.
Held
The Tribunal, considering the request for an additional opportunity and in the interest of justice, decided to grant the assessee one more chance to present their case before the ld. CIT(A). The issues raised in the appeal are remitted back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, with a direction for the CIT(A) to provide due opportunity of hearing. The assessee is also directed to be vigilant and ensure compliance with notices.
Key Issues
Whether the disallowance of depreciation was justified, considering the assessee's claim of an ex-parte order and denial of a fair opportunity of hearing before the CIT(A).
Sections Cited
250, 143(3), 143(3A), 143(3B)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD
The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to the Assessment Year 2018-19 is directed against the order dated 22.09.2025 of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of the Assessment Order dated 03.03.2021 passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Act.
On merits, assessee has raised ground regarding the disallowance at Rs.6,96,160/-. However, it is stated that impugned order is exparte and assessee did not get fair opportunity of hearing. Before me, ld. Counsel for the assessee
2 Raju Lekhraj Tanwani prayed for granting one more opportunity to go before ld.CIT(A) and plead its case.
I have heard the rival contentions and pursued the record placed before me. Assessee is an individual and in the assessment for A.Y. 2018-19 carried out under limited scrutiny depreciation at Rs.6,96,160/- has been disallowed against which the assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) but failed to appear on the given dates of hearing. Considering the request made by ld. Counsel for the assessee and there being no objection from the side of ld. DR, I in the larger interest of justice, deem it appropriate to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to go before ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, the issues raised in the instant appeal are remitted back to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the set aside proceeding shall afford due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and make satisfactory compliance to the notice(s) of hearing issued by ld.CIT(A) and should refrain from taking adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 16th day of February, 2026. (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ंक / Dated : 16th February, 2026. Satish
3 Raju Lekhraj Tanwani
आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent.
The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “SMC” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,
////
