ADITYA NAGARI SAHAKARI PATHSANSTHA LTD. ,PUNE vs. ITO WARD13(4), PUNE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 569/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 June 2024AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the NFAC's order did not comply with the requirements of Section 250(6) of the Act, as it failed to frame points of determination and provide detailed adjudication. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2020-2021 was decided ex-parte by the NFAC. The NFAC affirmed the assessment order which disallowed Section 80P deduction, added unexplained cash credit, and disallowed bad debts.

What were the issues?

Whether the NFAC's ex-parte order was passed in compliance with the procedural requirements of the Income Tax Act, specifically Section 250(6).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80P,Section 68,Section 250(6),Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

Hearing: 12.06.2024Pronounced: 19.06.2024

short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/ 250/2023-24/1059645987(1), dated 12.01.2024, in proceedings u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

The assessee pleads the following substantive grounds in the instant appeal :

2 ITA.No.569/PUN./2024

3.

A perusal of case file reveals at the outset that the main reason quoted in the learned NFAC’s order, for affirming the assessment findings herein inter alia disallowing the assessee’s claim of sec.80P deduction amounting to Rs.53,16,474/- as well as making sec.68 unexplained cash credit a.dof Rs.1,22,88,653/- followed by bad debts disallowance of Rs.73,66,500/-, respectively, has been passed ex-parte and that learned DR could hardly dispute that the impugned lower appellate discussion herein has nowhere complied with the rigor of sec.250(6) of the Act requiring it

3 ITA.No.569/PUN./2024 to effectively framing any points of determination followed by a detailed adjudication thereof. Faced with the situation, I 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.

4.

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

Order pronounced in the open Court on 19.06.2024.

More judgments on Section 80P

All 5,069 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80P →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →