SHRI GURUGOBINDSINGH PUBLIC WELFARE TRUST,SHRI GURUGOBIND MARG, MANMAD vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD 1(1), NASHIK, EXEMPTION WARD, NASHIK
What did the Tribunal hold?
The ITAT found that the CIT(A)-NFAC's order did not decide the substantive grounds of appeal on merits. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A)-NFAC for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal for AY 2017-2018 was dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A)-NFAC due to continuous non-appearance. The assessee did not appear before the ITAT either.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) order was passed without deciding the substantive grounds of appeal on merits due to the assessee's non-appearance.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE “A” BENCH : PUNE
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO
short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/ 250/2023-24/1056819126(1), dated 05.10.2023, involving proceedings u/s.144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte. 2 ITA.No.1314/PUN./2023
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 Sathe could hardly dispute the clinching fact that the CIT(A)-NFAC’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, we deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)-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 27.06.2024.
Sd/- Sd/- [INTURI RAMA RAO] [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated 27th June, 2024 VBP/-
3 ITA.No.1314/PUN./2023 Copy to
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- J.M.Swamy vs. Government Of INDIAKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- S. Nithyananda vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026
- Ritik vs. State Of M.P.Madhya Pradesh · 16 Oct 2026
- Venkadeswara Grill Works vs. The Joint Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026