CHAITANYA UBAN CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,LONAWALA-PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 9(5), PUNE, WARD NINE/FIVE PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 866/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 July 2024AY 2010-11Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) did not provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee before dismissing the appeal. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh disposal.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a cooperative society, filed its return of income declaring Nil income. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment ex-parte at a total income of Rs. 82,82,480/-. The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a significant delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without condoning the delay and without providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO

For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Hearing: 30.07.2024Pronounced: 30.07.2024

आदेश / ORDER

PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM:

1.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the CIT(A)-6, Pune, dated 14.01.2020 for the assessment year 2010-11.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Cooperative Society, filed the return of income for the A.Y. 2010-11 on 26.09.2010 declaring Nil income. Return was processed u/s.143(1) of the Act. The case was selected for Scrutiny and statutory notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) were issued to the appellant on 16.08.2012 along with detailed questionnaire. However, there was no response from the side of assessee society. In the circumstances, the AO vide order dated 18.03.2013 completed the assessment u/s.144 of the Act at a total income Rs.82,82,480/-.

3.

Aggrieved by the above assessment, the assessee society filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 1759 days. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as “Not Admitted”, without condoning the delay.

4.

Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal.

5.

When the matter was called on, none represented on behalf of the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. We therefore, proceed to dispose of the appeal after hearing the ld. Departmental Representative.

6.

We heard the ld. DR and perused the material on record. At the outset, we find that the appeal was filed before the CIT(A) with a delay of 1759 days. No explanation was filed by the assessee explaining the reasons for filing the appeal with a delay of 1759 days. However, we find from the order of CIT(A) that, before passing the ex parte order, no show cause notice was served upon the assessee. Thus, we are of the considered opinion that no reasonable opportunity was given by the CIT(A). In the circumstances, we remit the matter back to the file of CIT(A) for denovo disposal of appeal in accordance with law after affording due opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

7.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on this 30th day of July, 2024.

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →