VASUDEV YASHWANT ABHYANKAR,RAIGAD vs. ITO, WARD-4,, PANVEL, PANVEL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1146/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 September 2024AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI S.S. GODARA (Judicial Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A)/NFAC had not followed the due procedure by passing a speaking order and had not clearly indicated the opportunities granted. Therefore, the case was restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for a final opportunity to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC was dismissed ex-parte for want of prosecution as the assessee did not appear. The Assessing Officer had made additions of Rs. 21,30,000/-, Rs. 49,45,000/-, and Rs. 3,027/-.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A)/NFAC followed the due procedure in passing an ex-parte order without a speaking order and clear indication of opportunities granted to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 250(6),Section 56(2)(vii)(b),Section 43CA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE

Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & SHRI S.S. GODARA

For Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl CIT, DR

आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to:

1. 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant; प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 2.

More judgments on Section 56(2)(vii)(b)

All 626 judgments and leading authorities on Section 56(2)(vii)(b) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →