UJJAIN SHIKSHAN AND SHODH SAMITI,UJJAIN vs. EXEMPTION CIRCLE BHOPAL, BHOPAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 10/IND/2024Status: DisposedITAT Indore15 May 2024AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO (Judicial Member), SHRI B.M. BIYANI (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, in the interest of justice, decided to give the assessee another opportunity to present their case. The matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after providing a hearing opportunity.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) due to non-prosecution. The assessee claimed this was because their counsel failed to communicate hearing notices, leading to the assessee's unawareness of the hearings.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) was justified, and if the assessee should be granted an opportunity to represent their case afresh.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO & SHRI B.M. BIYANI

For Appellant: Shri S.S.Deshpande, CA
For Respondent: Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, CIT DR
Hearing: 14.05.2024Pronounced: 15.05.2024

आदेश / O R D E R

Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:

1.

Feeling aggrieved by appeal-order dated 22.11.2023 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 26.12.2017 passed by learned [“AO”] u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2012-13, the assessee has filed this appeal.

2.

Ld. AR for assessee has filed a Written-Submission running over 4 pages but during hearing before us, he made a limited submission that the Ujjain Shikshan & Shod Samitee, Ujjain assessee-society is engaged in imparting education. During assessment- proceeding for AY 2014-15, the AO made a reference for valuation of assessee’s building to the Departmental Valuation Officer (DVO) and based on DVO’s report, the case of present AY 2012-13 under consideration was re-opened wherein the AO made certain additions and determined total income at Rs. 3,72,34,543/-. The assessee challenged AO’s order in first- appeal but the CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order and dismissed assessee’s appeal for non-prosecution. Ld. AR pointed out that the non-prosecution has occurred because the notices of hearings were sent by CIT(A) to the e- mail address of counsel (Shri Sanjay Gupta) since the counsel had given his own email address. However, no communication was given by counsel about fixation of hearings, therefore the assessee was unaware of hearings. In these circumstances, the limited prayer of Ld. AR is to send this case back to CIT(A) for adjudication afresh in terms of section 250(6). Ld. DR does not have any objection to the prayer of Ld. AR but makes a request to direct the assessee to represent its case before CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments.

3.

In view of above submissions of parties and having regard to the principle of justice, we deem it fit to give one more opportunity to assessee so that the assessee can represent its case before CIT(A) for a proper adjudication. Accordingly, we remand this matter back to the file of CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication after giving opportunity of hearing to assessee. The Ujjain Shikshan & Shod Samitee, Ujjain Ld. CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments.

4.

Resultantly, this appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in open court on 15.05.2024.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →