APEAK INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NAGPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 243/NAG/2023Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 August 2024AY 2011-2012Bench: SHRI V. DURGA RAO (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that principles of natural justice require one more opportunity for the assessee to present their case. The CIT(A)'s ex-parte order was set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Apeak Infotech Pvt. Ltd., filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2011-12. The assessee did not appear before the CIT(A) despite opportunities, leading to an ex-parte order. The assessee's grounds included lack of opportunity, incorrect reopening of assessment, and addition under Section 68.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without affording sufficient opportunity and whether the reopening of assessment and additions made were justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

Before: SHRI V. DURGA RAO

For Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 27/05/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2011–12.

2.

In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:–

“The Hon. CIT(A) was not justified in dismissing the appeal without affording sufficient opportunity to the appellant. 2 The Ld. AO erred in reopening the assessment u/s.148. 3 The Ld. AO erred in making addition u/s.68 of Rs.44,87,000/-, without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case.”

Apeak Infotech Pvt. Ltd. ITA no.243/Nag./2023

3.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee appellant.

4.

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).

5.

I have heard both the learned Departmental Representative, perused the materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. I find that though the learned CIT(A) gave opportunities to the assessee, ultimately, the order passed by him is an ex-parte order. Therefore, I am 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 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 21/08/2024

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →