SANTOSH SHANTILAL MUTHIYAN,AURANGABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, AURANGABAD , AURANGABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 948/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 August 2024AY 2011-12Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and allowed the assessee another opportunity to present their case. The matter was set aside and remitted back to the NFAC for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the NFAC, which upheld an ex-parte assessment order by the AO. The assessee had failed to appear before both authorities despite multiple opportunities.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte assessment and dismissal of appeal were justified, and if the assessee had sufficient cause for non-compliance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE ‘B’ BENCH, PUNE

Before: HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI

For Appellant: Smt Deepa Khare [‘Ld. AR’]
For Respondent: Mr Arvind Desai [‘Ld. DR’]
Pronounced: 26/08/2024

ORDER PER G. D.PADMAHSHALI, AM; By present appeal, the assessee challenged the ex-parte DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1059480253(1) dt. 08/01/2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] by the National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘CIT(A)/NFAC’ hereinafter] which in turn confirmed the ex-parte order of assessment passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act by the Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-1, Aurangabad [‘AO’ hereinafter] for assessment year 2011-12 [‘AY’ hereinafter]; ITAT-Pune Page 1 of 3

Santosh Shantilal Muthiyan Vs ACIT 2. At the outset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate 39 days delay in instituting the present appeal, we in the larger interest of justice and after placing reliance on ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ reported 398 ITR 250 (Bom) and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC), deem it fit to condone the same and advanced accordingly.

3.

We have heard rival submission on the limited issue of ex-parte assessment and ex-parte dismissal of appeal by the first appellate authority; and subject to provisions of rule 18 of ‘ITAT Rules’ perused material placed on record.

4.

We note that, on the information that the assessee was in receipt of a sum of 2.5Crores against the agreement to sell of property entered which was subsequently forfeited due to cancellation of deal the case of the assessee was reopened. In the absence of representation & non-compliance the Ld. AO framed the assessment ex-parte to the best of his judgement u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act. Aggrieved assessee instituted an appeal against such ex-parte assessment before Ld. NFAC on 08/01/2019 wherein the first appellate authority provided as many as nine opportunity of hearing to the assessee right from May, 2019 till December, 2023, which however remained unnoticed and thus unattended. In the absence of effective representation and deprecative evidences, the Ld. NFAC dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte in line with the findings of the Ld. AO.

ITAT-Pune Page 2 of 3

Santosh Shantilal Muthiyan Vs ACIT 5. During the course of hearing the appellant assessee sufficiently explained various reasons behind such undeliberate non-compliance occurred before both the tax authorities below. After vouching the reasons behind such non-compliance, in the larger interest of justice we are of the view that the assessee for sufficient reasons prevented from representing himself before both the tax authorities below. In the event we deem it proper to accord one more opportunity to the assessee to enable him to place evidential material before the Ld. NFAC who shall consider the same and decide the issue in accordance with law.

6.

In view hereof, without commenting on merits, we set-aside the impugned order and remit the matters back to the file of Ld. NFAC with a direction to adjudicate the subject matter a fresh in accordance with law after providing three effective opportunities to the appellant assessee.

7.

The appeal in result is ALLOWED FOR STATISTCIAL PURPOSES. U/r 34 of ITAT Rules, order pronounced in open court on this Monday, 26th day of August, 2024.

-S/d- -S/d- S. S. GODARA G. D. PADMAHSHALI JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / PUNE; दिन ांक / Dated : 26th day of August, 2024. आदेशकीप्रतितितिअग्रेतिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1.अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr.CIT Concerned. 6.ग र्डफ़ इल / Guard File. 4. The CIT-Concerned(MH-India) 5. DR, ITAT, Bench ‘B’, Pune आिेश नुस र / By Order वररष्ठदनजीसदिव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकरअपीलीयन्य य दिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.

ITAT-Pune Page 3 of 3

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →