MANOJ MULCHAND BRAMHECHA ,AURANGABAD vs. ITO, WARD1(1), AURANGABAD , AURANGABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 507/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 June 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA (Vice President), SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeals to the NFAC for fresh adjudication. The assessee is to be given three effective opportunities of hearing to present their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to submit a rejoinder to the Assessing Officer's remand report before the NFAC. The NFAC proceeded ex-parte and confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer. The assessee's appeals were filed against these orders.

What were the issues?

Whether the NFAC rightly proceeded ex-parte without granting sufficient opportunities to the assessee, and whether the case should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA & SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 06.06.2024Pronounced: 19.06.2024

Din and Order Nos.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/ 1060120307(1); 1060120700(1); 1060121584(1) & 1060118362(1); all dated 25.01.2024, respectively involving proceedings u/s. 147 r.w.s.144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2 ITA.Nos.504 to 507/PUN./2024

Cases called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte. Case files perused.

2.

Learned DR vehemently argued during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities and more particularly, the NFAC herein, has rightly confirmed the Assessing Officer’s action making the impugned addition(s) in sec.144 assessments.

3.

We noticed in this factual backdrop that the assessee had filed his additional evidence in the lower appellate proceedings in tune with Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules.

Learned NFAC sought for a remand report. The Assessing Officer duly submitted the same. Learned NFAC thereafter sought for the assessee’s rejoinder by 15.12.2023 which could be submitted up-to 11.01.2024. All this prompted the learned NFAC to proceed ex-parte against the assessee thereby confirming the impugned addition(s).

3.1. The above narrated factual backdrop makes it clear that the assessee had failed to submit rejoinder to the Assessing Officer’s remand report(s) submitted before the NFAC. Learned DR fails to dispute that the assessee could be hardly termed as a habitual defaulter having failed to cooperate in the lower appellate proceedings. We accordingly deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore

3 ITA.Nos.504 to 507/PUN./2024 the assessee’s instant four appeals back to learned CIT(A)/ NFAC for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication in tune with sec.250(6) of the Act requiring it to effectively framing any points of determination followed by a detailed adjudication thereof. It is made clear that the same shall be subject to the assessee’s availing three effective opportunities of hearing to plead and prove all the relevant facts in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

4.

These assessee’s four appeals I.T.A.Nos.504, 505, 506 & 507/PUN./2024 are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 19.06.2024.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →