TULSHIRAM SITARAM KADU,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 2, AHMEDNAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2391/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 February 2026AY 2020-21Bench: DR.MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) had not granted an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Therefore, the matter was restored to the file of the CIT(A) for a fresh decision after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns the disallowance of expenses amounting to Rs. 16,71,885/-. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) did not provide an opportunity for a hearing before passing the order.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred by not providing an opportunity of hearing to the assessee before deciding the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(3),Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. Bora, Shri Eknath Abhang
Hearing: 04.02.2026Pronounced: 12.02.2026

Assessee by : Shri Suhas P. Bora Shri Eknath Abhang Revenue by : Date of hearing : 04.02.2026 Date of pronouncement : 12.02.2026 आदेश / ORDER The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to the Assessment Year 2020-21 is directed against the order dated 24.09.2025 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 02.09.2022 passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.144B of the Act.

2.

The grievance of the assessee revolves around the disallowance of expenses at Rs.16,71,885/-.

3.

At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ld.CIT(A) has not granted any opportunity of hearing and in support copy of e-portal has been placed on record. Only prayer is that fair opportunity of hearing may be granted before ld.CIT(A) to place relevant details to show that impugned disallowance is uncalled for.

4.

Ld. Departmental Representative did not oppose to the request made by ld. Counsel for the assessee.

5.

I have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before me. I observe that the assessee is an individual and has filed the return of income for A.Y. 2020-21 declaring income of Rs.11,36,010/- furnished on 11.12.2020. After the case selected for complete scrutiny, ld. Assessing Officer concluded the proceedings making disallowance of expenses at Rs.16,71,885/- under various heads namely Labour Transport and Hamli, Commission paid to others, packing expenses and water expenditure @20%. Assessee challenged the disallowances of expenses before ld.CIT(A). It is contended that ld.CIT(A) has not granted any opportunity. Perusal of the impugned order also supports the contention of the assessee since there is no reference to any notice of hearing given by ld.CIT(A). Copy of e-portal is also filed by the assessee showing that no opportunity has been granted.

6.

Under these given facts and circumstances and in the larger interest of justice, I deem it appropriate to restore the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A). Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) shall decide the issue in accordance with law after providing reasonable 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). It should refrain from taking adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the appellant are allowed for statistical purposes.

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

Order pronounced on this 12th day of February, 2026.

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →