ASHISH CHANDRAKANT SASTE,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 8(3), PUNE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the lower appellate authority's order lacked detailed adjudication as required by Section 250(6) of the Act. It also appeared to treat the assessment proceedings as penalty proceedings. Therefore, the Tribunal decided to grant the assessee one more opportunity of hearing.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was against an ex-parte order passed by the NFAC, which affirmed the AO's addition of unexplained money. The NFAC had passed this order due to the assessee's continuous non-appearance.
What were the issues?
Whether the NFAC's ex-parte order was passed without proper adjudication and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI R.K. PANDA & SHRI S.S. GODARA
Assessee by Shri Pratik Sandbhor Revenue by Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing 14-10-2024 Date of pronouncement 15-10-2024 आदेश / ORDER
PER S.S. GODARA, JM :
This assessee‟s appeal for AY 2017-18 arises against the NFAC, Delhi‟s order dated 04-06-2024 passed in case No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1065377048(1) in proceedings under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in short „the Act‟.
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
It emerges at the outset with the able assistance coming from both the parties that the learned CIT(A) / NFAC has passed this lower appellate order under challenge; ex-parte, after noticing the assessee‟s continuous non-appearance in para 4 page 5 therein, thereby affirming the AO's action making section 69A unexplained money addition of Rs.199,22,890/- in his assessment dated 29.03.2022.
Ld. AR vehemently argues that the lower appellate authority has not rightly confirmed the Assessing Officer's action in the foregoing terms.
Ld. DR would hardly dispute that the impugned lower appellate authority‟s discussion has neither framed its points of determination nor is there any detailed adjudication thereupon as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act. And also that although it prima facie appears para 7 of the CIT(A) / NFAC has treated the instant assessment proceedings as penalty as well. Be that as it may, we deem it appropriate in these peculiar facts and circumstances that larger interest would be met in case the assessee is afforded one more opportunity of hearing before the CIT(A) / NFAC. We order accordingly subject to rider that it shall be the assessee‟s risk and responsibility only to plead and prove all the relevant facts in consequential proceedings within three effective opportunities of hearing. Ordered accordingly.
This assessee‟s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 15th October, 2024.
Sd/- Sd/- (R.K. PANDA) (S.S. GODARA) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे Pune; ददिधांक Dated : 15th October, 2024 GCVSR आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: अपीऱधर्थी / The Appellant; 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent; 2. 3. The concerned Pr.CIT(A), Pune विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, पुणे “A” / 4. DR „A‟, ITAT, Pune गार्ड फाईल / Guard file 5. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune
Date 1. Draft dictated on 14-10-2024 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 15-10-2024 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the JM second member 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second JM Member. 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11. Date of dispatch of Order.
More judgments on Section 69A
- Vishal Kumar Patel(HUF), Raipur vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), RaipurITA 595/RPR/2026[2017-18]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- M/S Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Aasha Industries vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Bharat Iron Scrap vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026