Facts
The assessee filed an appeal challenging the CIT(A)'s order which disallowed a deduction under Section 54F. The CIT(A) passed the order ex-parte due to the assessee's non-appearance. The assessee also did not appear before the Tribunal.
Held
The Tribunal condoned a slight delay in filing the appeal. Considering the interest of justice, the Tribunal granted the assessee another opportunity to present their case on merits before the CIT(A).
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in disallowing the deduction under Section 54F based on incorrect facts and without proper verification.
Sections Cited
54F, 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI B R BASKARAN & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL
Date of Hearing – 10/06/2024 Date of Order – 18/06/2024
O R D E R PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, J.M.
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 04/01/2024 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2017-18.
Vivek Vasant Tawde. 2. In the interest of justice, the slight delay of 23 days in filing the present appeal by the assessee is condoned.
In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following ground:- “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and especially in law, the AO & Ld CIT (A) has erred by disallowing deduction u/s 54F of Rs. 1,40,00,000/- being investment in residential house and further erred in disallowing the benefit of Sec. 54F itself based on incorrect facts without further verifying the same.”
4. We have considered the submissions of both sides and perused the material available on record. The solitary issue raised by the assessee, in the present appeal, pertains to denial of exemption under section 54F of the Act. In the present case, at the outset, it is evident from the record that the learned CIT(A) has passed the order ex-parte due to the non-appearance of/on behalf of the assessee. Even in the present appeal before us, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee despite the service of notice. In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that in the interest of justice, the assessee be granted one more opportunity to represent its case on merits before the learned CIT(A). Consequently, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the impugned order and restore the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) for de novo adjudication of the appeal on merits after affording reasonable and adequate opportunity of hearing to the parties. The assessee is directed to appear before the learned CIT(A) on all the dates of hearing as may be fixed without any default. Accordingly, the sole ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Vivek Vasant Tawde. 5. In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 18/06/2024