HINDUSTANI EDUCATION SOCIETY,LATUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, NANDED, NANDED

PDF · subscribers
ITA 416/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 May 2024AY 2017-18Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI (Accountant Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and set aside the NFAC's order. The matter was remanded back to the NFAC to provide the assessee with two effective opportunities to present supporting material and decide the issues afresh on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC). The NFAC had dismissed the appeal without adjudicating on merits due to the assessee's failure to present cogent evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the NFAC erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without adjudicating on merits due to lack of material, and whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE ‘A’ BENCH, PUNE

Before: HON’BLE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI

For Appellant: Mr Sharad Shah [‘Ld. AR’]
For Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]
Pronounced: 30/05/2024

ORDER PER G. D.PADMAHSHALI, AM; By present appeal, the assessee impugns an ex-parte DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1058356609(1) dt. 30/11/2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [for short ‘Ld. NFAC’] u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act [for short ‘the Act’] which in turn arisen out of ex- parte best judgment order passed u/s 144 of the Act by the Income Tax Officer, Exemption-Ward, Nanded [for short ‘Ld. AO’] 2. At the outset of physical hearing the Ld. AR appearing on behalf of assessee drawn our attention to affidavit & petition filed for condonation of delay in instituting the present appeal and reiterating contents thereof prayed for condonation. Further without touching the grounds of appeal and merits of the case the Ld. AR candidly submitted that, in the event of appellant’s failure to represent the its case effectively with cogent evidences before first appellate authority, the Ld. NFAC culminated the proceedings ex-parte adjudicating issues on merits. In these ITAT-Pune Page 1 of 2

1.

Hindustani Education Society Vs ITO(E) circumstances the impugned order is suffered from the provisions of section 250(6) of the Act, for the reasons it is prayed for remand. The Ld. DR solidified the facts from the records could hardly object the condonation prayer and remand request.

3.

We have heard both rival parties on former two limited issues; and subject to provisions of rule 18 of ‘ITAT Rules’, perused material placed on record. At the outset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate 29 days delay in instituting the present appeal, we condoned the same in the larger interest of justice and after placing reliance on ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ reported 398 ITR 250 (Bom) and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC).

4.

From para 3 of the impugned order it is ostensibly clear that, for the want of material in support of grounds of appeal and claims, the Ld. NFAC dismissed the appeal without adjudicating the issues on merits, thus is suffered from the provisions of s/s (6) of section 250 of the Act. In the event we set-aside the impugned order & remit the matters back to the file of Ld. NFAC for providing two effective opportunities to the assessee to place on records cogent material in support of its claim and decide the issues a fresh on merits in accordance with law.

5.

The appeal in result is ALLOWED FOR STATISTCIAL PURPOSES. U/r 34 of ITAT Rules, order pronounced in open court on this Thursday 30th day of May, 2024.

-S/d- -S/d- S. S. GODARA G. D. PADMAHSHALI JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / PUNE; दिन ांक / Dated : 30th day of May, 2024. आदेशकीप्रतितितिअग्रेतिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1.अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr.CIT(Exemption),Pune 6.ग र्डफ़ इल / Guard File. 4. The CIT-Concerned(MH-India) 5. DR, ITAT, Pune Bench ‘A’, Pune आिेश नुस र / By Order वररष्ठदनजीसदिव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकरअपीलीयन्य य दिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.

ITAT-Pune Page 2 of 2

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →