SWAPNIL ANIL AHIRKAR ,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -4(1), NAGPUR
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO
The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the impugned order dated 22/08/2019, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–1, Nagpur, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2010–11.
In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:–
“1. The Ex-party order passed is illegal, invalid and bad in law. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) erred in not considering the adjournment filed by the assessee on 30/05/2019 and dismissed appeal without any basis, therefore order passed is unjustified, unwarranted and excessive. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 21,35,178/ though the issue is squarely covered by the order of Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur
2 Swapnil Anil Ahirkar ITA no.302/Nag./2019
as well as order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-I dated 28/10/2014 vide No. CIT(A)-1/687/2011-12 in assessee's own case. Therefore, additions confirmed are unjustified, unwarranted and excessive. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.1,77,518/- as disallowance out of commission expenses. The additions confirmed are unjustified, expenses. unwarranted and excessive. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.12,57,660/- as out of sale of public utilize plot. The additions confirmed are unjustifiedy unwarranted and excessive. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) erred in not confirming addition of Rs.7,00,000/- as out of rent expenses, therefore the addition confirmed by the CIT(A) are illegal, invalid and bad in law. 7. The appellant denies liability of interest u/s. 234A, 234B and 234C of the income Tax Act, 1961, without prejudice the levy of interest is unjustified, unwarranted and excessive. 8. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or grounds of appeal or raise any ground or grounds at the time of hearing of the appeal.”
When this appeal is taken up for hearing, the learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order by not providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The learned CIT(A) has even not considered the adjournment application filed on 30/05/2019, and dismissed the appeal of the assessee without issuing a speaking order. The learned Counsel thus prayed that one more opportunity may be given to the assessee to substantiate its case before the learned CIT(A).
On the other hand, 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).
3 Swapnil Anil Ahirkar ITA no.302/Nag./2019
We have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. We find that though the learned CIT(A) gave opportunities to the assessee, ultimately, the order passed by him is an ex-parte order. The learned CIT(A) has not considered the adjournment application filed by the assessee. While going through the impugned order, we find that the order passed by the learned CIT(A) is not a speaking order or on merit even. Therefore, we are of the opinion that by following the principles of natural justice, one more opportunity should be given to the assesse to substantiate his 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 CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate the matter afresh and pass a speaking order. Needless to say, the learned CIT(A) is directed to provide 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 and comply the notices by the learned CIT(A) promptly. Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the assessee in this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 20/09/2024
Sd/- V. DURGA RAO JUDICIAL MEMBER NAGPUR, DATED: 20/09/2024
4 Swapnil Anil Ahirkar ITA no.302/Nag./2019
Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Nagpur; and (5) Guard file. True Copy By Order Pradeep J. Chowdhury Sr. Private Secretary Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur
5 Swapnil Anil Ahirkar ITA no.302/Nag./2019
Date Initial 1. Dictated on .09.2024 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author .09.2024 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed – – JM/AM before the second member 4. Draft discussed / approved – – JM/AM by Second Member 5. Approved Draft comes to .09.2024 Sr.PS the Sr.PS/PS 6. Date of pronouncement .09.2024 Sr.PS 7. File sent to the Bench Clerk .09.2024 Sr.PS 8. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 9. Date of dispatch of Order
