MEGA SPACES,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-12(1), PUNE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 747/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 June 2024AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) is directed to provide at least three effective opportunities of hearing to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A) for assessment year 2016-2017, leading to an ex-parte order. The CIT(A) did not decide the substantive grounds of appeal on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated the appeal on merits when the assessee failed to appear, and if the ex-parte order was justified without deciding substantive grounds.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 250(6)

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

Hearing: 26.06.2024Pronounced: 26.06.2024

Din and Order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2023-24/1060708328(1), dated 09.02.2024, in proceedings u/s.144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

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 Addl/JCIT(A)’s

2 ITA.No.747/PUN./2024 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 Addl/JCIT(A), Indore, for his 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.

3.

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

Order pronounced in the open Court on 26.06.2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →