What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal to the NFAC for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to file and prove all relevant facts in the consequential proceedings.

The assessee's appeal for AY 2015-2016 was rejected ex-parte by the CIT(A) due to non-appearance. The CIT(A)'s order did not decide the substantive grounds of appeal on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order was valid when it failed to decide the substantive grounds of appeal on merits due to the assessee's non-appearance.

Ashok Nandlal Mundhada, Amravati vs ITO | ITAT Nagpur 2024

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH : NAGOUR

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

Hearing: 28.03.2024Pronounced: 19.04.2024

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH : NAGOUR [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT ITAT : PUNE] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.197/NAG./2023 Assessment Year 2015-2016 Shri Ashok Nandlal Mundhada, Poonam The Income Tax Officer, Construction, Ward No.18, Ward-3, Aayakar Bhawan, vs. Devikanandan Khaparde Ambapeth, Amravati Bagicha, Amravati-444 601. Maharashtra. PIN – 444 602. Maharashtra. PAN ABCPM6566G (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Mahavir Atal, C.A. For Revenue : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 28.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 19.04.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. :

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2015-2016 arise against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1053246294(1) dated 27.05.2023, involving proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Heard both the parties. Case files perused.

It emerges during the course of hearing that the CIT(A) has noted the assessee’s continuous non-appearance in the lower appellate proceedings before rejecting the assessee’s contentions vide ex-parte order under challenge. Shri Marathe could hardly

2 ITA.No.197/NAG./2023 dispute the clinching fact that the CIT(A)’s order has nowhere decided the assessee’s substantive grounds on merits as contemplated u/sec.250(6) of the Act requiring it to give points for determination followed by a detailed adjudication thereof. Faced with the situation, I deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the NFAC for it’s afresh adjudication, preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing, subject to the rider that it shall be the taxpayer’s onus and responsibility only to file and prove all the relevant facts in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 19.04.2024.

ASHOK NANDLAL MUNDHADA,AMRAVATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3 - AMRAVATI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments