SHRI SATYA SAI BAHUUDESHIYA SHIKSHAN PRASHIKSHAN SANSTHA ,CHANDRAPUR vs. ITO WARD-3, EXEMP., NAGPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 336/NAG/2024Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 October 2024AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI V. DURGA RAO (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order. While the Revenue opposed restoring the matter, the Tribunal decided to grant the assessee one opportunity to present its case.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2015-16. The assessee did not appear before the ITAT, and no adjournment was sought. The Revenue's representative supported the CIT(A)'s order.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in not allowing deductions and disallowing a claim without proper opportunity to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 13(3),Section 13(1)(c)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO

For Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 14/05/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2015–16.

2.

The assessee has raised following grounds:–

“1] Learned CIT(A) erred in not allowing the deduction u/s.13(3) and 13(1)(c) claimed by the Appellant. 2] Learned A.O. and CIT(A) both have not considering Appellant's submission and various documents filed before them.

2 Shree Satya Sai Bahuudeshiya Shikshan Prashikshan Sanstha ITA no.336/Nag./2024 3] Learned CIT(A) erred in disallowing the claim amounting to Rs.9,40,000/-. 4] Learned CIT(A) erred in not giving proper opportunity to the Appellant. 5] Appellant crave to urge additional grounds at the time of hearing, if necessary.”

3.

When this appeal is taken up for hearing, no one was present on behalf of the assessee to represent its case and assist the Bench for adjudication of its appeal. There is no application for adjournment of hearing either. Therefore, I proceed to dispose of the appeal ex–parte qua the assessee after hearing the learned Departmental Representative and on the basis of material available on record.

4.

The learned D.R. submitted that the learned CIT(A) has given sufficient opportunities inspite of that the assesse has not appeared before the learned CIT(A) and not filed relevant details. He strongly supported the orders passed by the learned CIT(A).

5.

I find that the learned CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order. I also find that though the learned CIT(A) gave opportunities to the assessee, ultimately, the order passed by him is an ex-parte order. Though the learned Departmental Representative has opposed for restoring the entire matter to the file of the learned CIT(A), however, I am of the opinion that one opportunity should be granted to the assessee to substantiate its case by restoring the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer to enable the assessee to substantiate its case before the learned CIT(A). In view of the above, the order passed by the learned CIT(A) is set aside and remit the matter to the file of the learned

3 Shree Satya Sai Bahuudeshiya Shikshan Prashikshan Sanstha ITA no.336/Nag./2024 CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate the matter afresh after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the assessee in this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 25/10/2024

More judgments on Section 13(3)

All 563 judgments and leading authorities on Section 13(3) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →