SHREE BALAJI UDYOG,JALNA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, JALNA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 537/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 May 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI GD PADMAHSHALI (Accountant Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) did not decide the substantive grounds of appeal on merits as required by Section 250(6) of the Act. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2017-2018 was filed against an order of the NFAC. The assessee failed to appear before the lower appellate authority, leading to an ex-parte order.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated the appeal on merits when the assessee failed to appear. Whether the CIT(A) followed the procedural requirements of Section 250(6) in its ex-parte order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE “B” BENCH : PUNE : [HYBRID HEARING]

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI GD PADMAHSHALI,

Hearing: 22.05.2024Pronounced: 28.05.2024

Date of Hearing : 22.05.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 28.05.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. :

This assessee’s appeal for assessment years 2017- 2018, arise against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/ 250/2023-24/1059918079(1), dated 19.01.2024, involving proceedings u/s.143(3) 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.

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

2 ITA.No.537/PUN./2024 contentions vide ex-parte order under challenge. Shri Nayak could hardly dispute the clinching fact that the CIT(A)’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, Delhi, 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.

3.

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

Order pronounced in the open Court on 28.05.2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →